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?
I work at McChord AFB (Joint Base Lewis McChord). The last âoefurloughâ, I did not work and so was not paid. They spread the days out such that you could not get unemployment. As well, we could not use earned leave (even though that's my leave which they must pay me for anyway).
This time around, I was classified as a âoemission essentialâ 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.
The thing is, for some reason a lot of people think that Federal employees all make six figures. It isn't so. The vast majority make $50,000 or less. I'm not complaining about my pay scale. But having lost around $2500 in savings with the last âoefurloughâ, my accounts are a bit thin.
I wonder if my landlord and the electric company will take âoeretroactiveâ payments? I suspect not. As my wife has MS, we are a single income family. And again, I'm not complaining about my pay rate, I took this job, no one twisted my arm. Fortunatly for me, I have a large family that will pitch in and help me out. Others are not so fortunate, this will hurt a lot of worker bees.
The only good thing out of this is that the Republicans â" most of whom would vote to end this if Boehner would allow a vote â" are slitting their own throats because they are scared of a minority of Tea Baggers. Next election, the House will belong to the Democrats, and the Tea Baggers will return home frothing at the mouth. Good for them.
The republicans have *always* relied on the votes of the stupid, by telling them that they (the Republicans - the greedy business elite) are just like them and are on their side. Now their dupes are the govt-haters who don't want to pay their taxes. Not long ago it was the bible thumpers and Jesus lovers, who hoped the "moral" Republicans would put down those pinko atheist Democrats. Before that, before they changed their name, the Republicans were âoeSouthern Democratsâ who yelled "The niggers are taking over and want to marry your lily-white daughter." The Republican politicians are just careerists who take money from the elite in order to remain in office. *Their* goal is power and the perks.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
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).
In aspirational terms, the time the government is shut down is money in my tax-payer pocket.
In actual terms, the time the government is shut down is time that the people not working during it will be back-payed for it and -- at best -- my tax-payer pocket will be pilfered just as much. At worst, all the sensational bullshit of this event will be used to justify taking even *more* out of my tax-payer pocket.
So, really, the only way it impacts me is that either absolutely nothing changes or things get slightly financially worse, but they were headed that way anyway, so whatever.
Well, paid-vacation with the chance of not being able to pay your bills and maybe losing your apartment or home or car or other things which will seriously mess with their lives and well-being, if their full paychecks are delayed long enough. Just because they'll eventually get paid doesn't mean that they wouldn't be negatively impacted in the meantime, if they are in a position that forces them to live paycheck to paycheck.
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.
...I've been affected by the way that the "leader of the free world" has once again demonstrated its disdain for democracy: if the right wing don't like something passed by representatives of the people, it seems they can just deny everything else. If I can't keep a few million of you in desperation, FUCK YOU I'M TAKING MY BALL HOME, &c.
I look forward to my country following this awful example.
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.
The whole problem?
I'd love to send some of these small government fetishists back to the start of the 19th century to see what it really felt like for the average man (or, worse, woman).
Honestly, the most this whole mess has affected me, a college professor at a state university, is to fill my head with thoughts of taking my bare hands and strangle the life out of some of these yahoos in Washington. I know of many people who have been furloughed, as I am involved in federally funded research and have many colleagues who work under the umbrella of the federal gov't, some of whom have been furloughed, some of whom have not. My thoughts lately are about the looming debt ceiling "crisis" and how perhaps we are truly approaching the moment with the United States of America goes the way of every other superpower the world has ever seen... only we still have nukes and billions of guns. Sadly, if this happens, it will have come from within, not the result of a worthy enemy. And make no mistake about it: Pull away the curtain and this is all the doings of the ultra-rich who are pulling the strings. These people have nothing but pure disdain for the commoners and the poors and do not care that they are playing roulette, since all chambers are loaded and the gun is not pointing at them.
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me?
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.
In other words, 'we had a year to come up with a budget and you decided to wait until the last minute and blackmail the rest of the government to get your way. If I give in to that, this crap will never end...guess I can't negotiate." Your POV is a little skewed.
Since congress already voted to pay all furloughed workers for the days they missed, what is exactly the point of not having them come into work anymore?
Er... have you been reading the news haven't you? OK, I'll explain.
It's never been about saving money. The GOP wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but doesn't have the votes in the Senate to do it, much less override the veto that would inevitably provoke.
So plan B was to take funding for implementing ACA out of the budget. But they don't have the votes to do that either.
Now when you are arguing over the budget, you still have to keep things running; soldiers and air traffic controllers have to be paid. But the president doesn't have the constitutional power to spend money; he has to spend what Congress tells him to spend, neither more nor less (a lot of Americans don't seem to understand this). He has a lot of influence over the budget, but ultimately Congress has the power of the purse.
So what Congress does when it can't resolve its budget differences on time is pass something called a "continuing resolution". It pretty much says "continue on as you were under the last budget for so many days or until we hash this out." Congress is behind on its budget work so, it's time for a continuing resolution.
What the House Republicans tried to do was slip the budget stuff they didn't have the votes to pass into the continuing resolution. When the Senate stripped that stuff out and sent the CR back to the House, the Republican leadership refused to bring the CR to a vote until their demands were met. Those demands have been a moving target, running from a long laundry list of priorities (including stuff like the Keystone pipeline), to anything that will allow them to claim victory. Boehner has also floated a cut of a certain size to yet-to-be-named budget items as a condition, but this was precisely the gambit that was tried in 2011. Those cuts never materialized, triggering the sequestration cuts across the board this year, including defense. That's not very credible. So the only way the House Republicans come out of this with something that looks like a victory would be to get ACA de-funded, which is not going to happen.
The House Republicans are technically within their rights not to bring an continuing resolution to the floor, but they're using it to undermine the Constitution. They don't have the votes to get what they want, nor have they anything offer in exchange that will persuade anyone else to vote with them, so they're trying to *compel* the Senate to vote the way they want by shutting down the government.
Honestly, it feels like final years of the Roman Republic, when wealthy, ambitious men competed to carve power bases for themselves out of what had been offices of service to the Republic. Crassus Boehner, anyone?
Now they basically get a free paid vacation. If the taxpayer is on the hook for their salaries, they should be doing their jobs.
I agree with you. They should be back at their jobs, and being paid on payday as usual (you do know that essential employees aren't getting paid). But that's not going to happen until one side or another cracks under the political pressure. Already the US Chamber of Commerce is wading in with promises of primary support to Republicans who vote for a clean CR.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Those of us who are funded at least partly by NSF grants are potentially in trouble. For people who have money in their account from an active grant that will last a few months - all the better. For those whose paycheck depends on the next installment from a grant, tough luck. The worst affected will be folks who had payments and grant reviews in progress.
More info @ http://www.nsf.gov./ The most relevant portions:
Payments: No payments will be made during the shutdown.
Issuance of New Grants and Cooperative Agreements: No new grants or cooperative agreements will be awarded.
"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.
It's down because demand is down. As in, a large group of people stopped buying fuel.
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
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.
I completely disagree w/ the PP, but it's not a troll or flamebait. It's an opinion. Don't mod it down just because you disagree w/ it.
It makes me drink more and play more GTA V.
My wife wants to go all Ted Cruz on me and filibuster about how "grown men" shouldn't be playing "video games", but I just whipped out my gavel and told her that all I need for cloture is 50 plus 1 and I got the tie-breaker hanging right here.
I think I might be in trouble now. I heard my car alarm going off a few minutes ago, and I'm afraid to go look.
You are welcome on my lawn.
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.
... it only affects me by having too many stories about it on /.
Speak for yourself. I'm enjoying the entertainment immensely. I'm thinking of selling popcorn.
When you live in the rest of the world, the US government is the bogeyman that your politicians try to scare you with. The surest way to cast doubt on a proposal to reform health care is to say "it would put us on the road to a US-style health care system". The surest way to cast doubt on a proposal to change election procedures is to say "we don't want US-style elections". I'm sure I don't even need to mention gun control.
So this is kind of like a hilariously cheesy horror movie, complete with slow pacing, bad over-the-top acting, and cheap effects. Think original Evil Dead trilogy.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
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.
"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.
Well, then the AVERAGE person should cut back so they can live within their means, or get a better job.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Why? Are you a military contractor or employed directly or indirectly by the DOD?
Otherwise, you don't need the military at the size that it is. Do you really think that the trillions of dollars spent in Iraq actually benefitted US citizens?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
What the fuck do you need a military for? Canada isn't going to invade, and neither is anyone south of Texas or from the Caribbean. 2000 miles of ocean separates us from our closest "enemies" - and they're totally fucking dependent on our dollars to keep their economies running.
If you and your friends have guns you don't need a military.
Of course, if you do decide to shut down the government there do happen to owe each other about $8 Trillion (bonds and ss debt), and there are a few other debtors for about $7T who might think ill of us. And border patrol - gonna be a lot of folks coming north. FAA might be useful, though if you don't fly you probably don't care. You probably don't believe in vaccinations either, so you'll be fine without the CDC. As long as your rich, or you home school, losing federal ed money shouldn't matter. Of course, there will be another 3-5 million, mostly white collar, workers put onto the streets, but - hey - at least we won't have to worry about having to play any unemployment benefits!
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
My colleagues and I work at a non-profit research institute affiliated with the State of Florida university system. We just do research. No students, no classes. It's all soft money and the vast majority of our funding, maybe 90%, comes as contracts and grants from Federal agencies. There are two huge problems that are hurting us right now. First, if the government cannot make the incremental payments to us on existing grants or contracts, then we don't get paid. That is happening right now. Not only are we not hiring, people are taking salary cuts or going to half time or worse. The payments from the government come at different times throughout the year and are different depending on the grant and the agency, so it is not a issue of the lights suddenly getting turned off. But the impact, however incremental, is very real and it is NOW. I have enough cash on hand from my largest existing grant to keep myself and my group going through December maybe. That brings up the second problem, which is the whole proposal process. Continuity in our research projects requires that we are always in "proposal mode." Grants and contracts are for limited amounts for limited duration. It can take a long time and a lot of effort to get funded since the level of competition is very high. (Competition is ok - I welcome being pushed to do my best.) Right now I have proposals and white papers and discussions with program managers that are all in limbo - and the clock is ticking. Even if they are approved, it will take many months, maybe half a year, to receive the first increment of funding. What's more, the tendency of program managers when they are uncertain about the funds available to their program is to be VERY conservative about making new commitments, regardless of proposal quality. They are also really p.o. 'ed about being furloughed and this makes them surly. In such circumstances, it is difficult to talk about research continuity.
There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about. -- John von Neumann
Well, then the AVERAGE person should cut back so they can live within their means, or get a better job.
Of course. If anyone, ever, has problems making ends meet it is solely due to moral failings. Let us all judge them now and condemn them.
Knowing the game and what quarter we currenty in will provide insight on the future required moves.
We are currently in the game of choosing sides. The deadline is the 18th or 17th. We have until then to divide the public into credit is income, and we spent too much already and we can't afford another entitlement. Because the public knows so little about the borrowing of money by the government (payments need to be made.. no problem just borrow more to make the payments until our entire income goes to makeing payments with no other payments being made. Someday that train will wreck. Oh, back on topic.. The game plan,
The other side's plan is shutting down the government. You public need to get educated and join our side or the conquences will be dire. This posturing will run until default at the earliest, maybe later. This is a race to place more canidates of party X or Y in the house and senate at the next election. Nobody can agree on anything until then.
I'll check for updates on the 19th. Wake me up then.
In the meantime, the play by play is a news reporters dream. 2 solid weeks of political drama.
The truth shall set you free!
Fiscal conservtives are trying to save money supposedly ...close the guvmint damn it because the deficit is too large...and yet they voted yesterday .. ...the centrist to the righties...(there are no elected lefties in the US except for may be the Vermont Senator) ...its like trying to drown a carp !
all of them
to pay and make us stay home...
Yup great fiscal conservatism.
The problem is not government it is idiots running the government.
First, don't pay your phone bill, that way creditors can't call. That's why it's best to have a land line and cell phone. Then, to get you back on feet, skip your car/insurance bills
rewriting history since 2109
Someone "decided to wait until the last minute".
The Republicans passed theirs March 21st 2013, seven months ago. That's before Obama submitted his proposal.
Obama keeps submitting proposals so bad that not a single DEMOCRAT will vote for them. Think about that. Not one member of his own party will put their name on the crap Obama has been submitting since he took office. I dont recall if any of his five annual budget proposals got even one vote of support - I do recall that at least two or three years he couldn't get even one junior house member to sign on to his crap.
We have until then to divide the public into credit is income, and we spent too much already and we can't afford another entitlement. Because the public knows so little about the borrowing of money by the government (payments need to be made.. no problem just borrow more to make the payments until our entire income goes to makeing payments with no other payments being made. Someday that train will wreck
And when Clinton left office, the government had a surplus. Rather than use that surplus to pay down the debt, which would have created more surplus, and a positive feedback cycle (up until the point when 9/11 slammed the brakes on the economy). But, rather than do the fiscally-responsible thing, Bush decided he wanted a tax cut to bump his approval rating, so that when the economy hit the wall, the lower tax rate compounded the problem... and rather than let those tax cuts expire, the Republicans would rather continue to kick the problem down the road a little further so that they don't face the political backlash of having *gasp* raised taxes.
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
So you're basically saying if we can't borrow money from ourselves, to pay ourselves, we default. Hmmm. I think default happens when we can't pay interest on the debt owed to foreign creditors. Which is about 250 billion a year, currently.
You mean the tax cut that Barack Obama just made permanent? That one? I got some news. The tax cut happened in 2001. The tax rates have been in effect since then, or 12 years. More than a decade. Newt Gingrich was speaker of the house when we balanced the budget. Spending and taxes originate in the House, and no matter how much Barack Obama wants it to be true, they will never originate in the White House.
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
If they can afford to cut back, then their employer can afford to pay them less.
Welcome to capitalism, slave. Now get back to work!
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
I have before worked for an employer who said he could not pay me for a while, but I should keep working.
That happened a few times over a few years. Eventually I got my money back but it took a long time and there was a significant back pay that floated for a year.
So knowing that was a pattern, what did I do? I left to find other work.
Government is NO DIFFERENT. If you are going to obviously be screwed over every time the Government needs to figure out a yearly budget (hint: they can't) or bump against the debt ceiling (hint: very often), then you need to LEAVE.
You didn't say if you were enlisted or not but it seems like not. Most people take government jobs because they are easier but if you are not liking this new tradeoff you need to leave, which is what every worker in the private sector would generally do... the mistake is thinking that delayed pay and worse is something that only happens to government workers during a furlough, because in real life it happens to people quite often.
I hope more government workers figure this out, and fast - and that it takes the shine of government work for others also.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You do realize that "Non-Essential" is internally determined by each department, right? The only guideline they have is "personnel essential to protection of life and property."
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
That's exactly what moderation is for. We get enough false equivalency from mainstream news sources. Some statements are just plain wrong, and should be modded down. Or do you mod up creationists?
See, the trouble with your BS assertion is that it's so easy to google "7450 Affordable Care Act" and find all the articles disproving it...
Oh, and the PDF you're linking to says nothing about the cost for a family of 4. It's just talking about lower overall health spending. Are you an Astro turfer or do you just not research your sources?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I give you the Iron Law of Wages:
"The Iron Law of Wages is a proposed law of economics that asserts that real wages always tend, in the long run, toward the minimum wage necessary to sustain the life of the worker."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_wages
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
This ruse is only working because people aren't aware of the subtleties of how governments are financed; particularly OURS. We're a country where just calling Obamacare the ACA increases favorability by 10% or more. And, pointing out what it actually does increases it by more than that.
Look at some of the uninformed, superficial arguments being regurgitated here "but Republicans presented 4 proposals and Obama refuses to negotiate!"
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Well:
"Obamacare is their attempt to get the majority of the population dependent on government for medical care."
Since the vast majority of people will continue to pay unsubsidized price of their health insurance to private companies, there is no possible way this statement, which is the crux of his entire statement, can possibly be true.
"Get as many people as possible dependent on the government. Then nobody dare oppose them"
The federal programs instituted by FDR have been around for about 70 years now, and Democrats have most definitely NOT stayed in power that whole time. Even if there was the slightest bit of truth to this claim, all the Republicans have to do is promise not to take away Obamacare, and they're right back on-par with Democrats, aren't they? Besides, Republicans are facing a demographic shift that is promising to make them non-viable in national politics in just a decade or so, meaning Democrats don't have to do ANYTHING to undermine them. The Republicans have done a superb job undermining themselves.
"What you are seeing is the liberal's strategy for staying in power."
In fact Obamacare was terribly unpopular, and numerous Democratic senators lost their seats specifically because they voted for it. They must have voted for it for other reasons than political expediency.
"Imagine the power they will wield when they can threaten to shut down the government and take away your health care."
Except it's always Republicans threatening to shut down the government, and taking away or "privatizing" government services.
Every single sentence in his post is quite easily provably factually incorrect. And the implication of some vast, sinister conspiracy makes it troll/flamebait.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
It's similar in the UK and Canada too - failing to pass the budget counts as a vote of no confidence in the government which triggers a general election. Having lived in the US for several years though I think the problem with their system of government is that it has not been updated in over 200 years. It started off as a brilliant, world-leading system for the late 18th century but it has so many checks and balances in it that updating it is all but impossible without an overwhelming consensus that is rarely achievable. The result is that they are left limping along with a 200+ year old governmental system that was designed when communication with the capital took days or weeks by horse.
That surplus had nothing to do with either Clinton or Gingrich (even though both like to take credit for it.) That surplus was entirely the result of excess tax revenue resulting from a bubbled economy. There never was a true surplus that could have lasted, as soon as the bubble popped it was going to become a deficit no matter what. The stupid thing is that both of them added more entitlements while we had that surplus under the foolish assumption that it would last forever. Well guess what, now we have an even bigger deficit than we had before. That deficit that we have today can be partially attributed to both Clinton and Gingrich.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
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.
You know what happens to people in real life when they are laid off, even if temporarily? They find another job. Being a mechanic you'd think he could find some work pretty rapidly if he needed income badly.
How easy is it to find work when - as I understand it - you can be called back to work on a day's notice? Not many employers need an employee that could disappear in a puff of smoke at any time. Of course you could be clearing out a work backlog or something like that, but yeah...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Once most people are buying insurance through Obamacare
... You do realize there is no insurance plan that is "Obamacare". The public option was nixed in the Senate before the ACA was voted on. What we have now is are minimum standards which any health insurance provided can provide.
This is as idiotic as saying that the safety regulations imposed by the NHTA on automakers will lead to a "takeover of the auto industry. Just give it time and the NHTA will be the only game in town!"
Seriously, read up on the law.
I wish our energy was really spent figuring out why healthcare costs so much
If only our energy was spent on that and not wasted on putting the brakes on unsubstantiated rumors and right out fabrications.
Funny you mention medicare considering they run a 1% (6% if you include the privatized portion) overhead compared to the ~15-20% private insurers are bitching about having to adhere to .
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
In Australia we have a section of our constitution which would prevent this kind of stunt. Basically any bills dealing with matters of financing the government can ONLY cover matters of financing the government. The house wouldn't be able to hold the government to ransom as bills adding some weird condition to continuing to operate the government wouldn't legally even get through the house.
The only way this financial situation would lead to a double dissolution would be if the government of the day was actually suicidal, in which case they could just call an election and save everyone the heartache of rejecting a bill twice.
You also forgot one important note. Since all seats are open the requirement to win a seat is different from a normal election and as such a double dissolution changes power in more places at once than a normal election. This helps ensure we don't end up with the same people causing the mess getting voted in again, though that has happened in the past.
As a researcher in mathematics, I am fortunate to have a great position and supportive research environment. I still get a paycheck and my day-to-day life continues more-or-less the same, but there are a number of thoughtless consequences indirectly for me, mainly due to the National Science Foundation being currently unfunded. My NSF grant money was delivered some time ago to my grants office and I can spend money as usual for my postdocs and students, so it isn't affecting me there directly. Instead, we have the following consequences:
To my mind, these are a big disruption. For people in the lab sciences whose funding is disrupted, projects that have been ongoing or building up can be seriously affected. For people whose funding record will have a big role in their hiring, tenure, and promotion situation, this is a huge stress-inducing situation.
Blegh. This is a completely unnecessary disruption to thousands of scientists and researchers. Science research funding in the US has always been a pain, even when things go smoothly. Excellent researchers have left for Europe over the years due to frustrations with the NSF system, and things like this will exacerbate that problem.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) research grant system is even larger scale and is also totally on hold, with consequent disruptions. And with the life sciences, uncertainty in projects can be more problematic as it is often harder to put things on hold. I feel sorry for people whose funding needs to be renewed, is under consideration, or needs adjustment now as this is a huge hassle.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
It kind of depends on who you mean by "poor." Young, middle-class low-net-worth folks would actually benefit from inflation (assuming their salary keeps up) because it would deflate their fixed-interest-rate debt (e.g. mortgages and student loans).
Genuinely poor folks get screwed of course, because their debt is variable-interest-rate revolving and their housing costs increase with inflation.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz