Slashdot Mirror
What a Government Shutdown Will Mean For NASA and SpaceX (theverge.com)
Ars Technica reports of how the government shutdown affects federal agencies like NASA, as well as commercial companies like SpaceX: So far, NASA has been keeping quiet about this particular shutdown and has been directing all questions to the White House Office of Management and Budget, which did not respond to a request for comment. But NASA's acting administrator, Robert Lightfoot, told employees in an email obtained by The Verge to be on alert for directions over the next couple of days. "If there is a lapse in funding for the federal government Friday night, report to work the same way you normally would until further notice, and you will receive guidance on how best to closeout your activities on Monday," he wrote in the email. The most recent guidance from NASA, released in 2017, indicates that all nonessential employees should stay home during a shutdown, while a small contingent of staff continue to work on "excepted" projects. The heads of each NASA center decide which employees need to stay, but they're typically the people who operate important or hazardous programs, including employees working on upcoming launches or those who operate satellites and the International Space Station.
NASA's next big mission is the launch of its exoplanet-hunting satellite, TESS, which is going up on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Florida in March. So it shouldn't be affected by a shutdown (unless it takes a while to find a resolution). However, it's possible that preparations on another big spacecraft, the James Webb Space Telescope, may come to a halt, according to Nature. The space telescope is currently at NASA's Johnson Space Center for testing, but NASA's guidelines say that only spacecraft preparations that are "necessary to prevent harm to life or property" should continue during a shutdown. More immediately, an Atlas V rocket from the United Launch Alliance is launching a missile-detecting satellite tonight out of the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida, while SpaceX is slated to launch a communications satellite on January 30th. The timing of both launches may mean they avoid the shutdown. But if they did occur during the shutdown, it's unclear if they would suffer delays.
NASA's next big mission is the launch of its exoplanet-hunting satellite, TESS, which is going up on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Florida in March. So it shouldn't be affected by a shutdown (unless it takes a while to find a resolution). However, it's possible that preparations on another big spacecraft, the James Webb Space Telescope, may come to a halt, according to Nature. The space telescope is currently at NASA's Johnson Space Center for testing, but NASA's guidelines say that only spacecraft preparations that are "necessary to prevent harm to life or property" should continue during a shutdown. More immediately, an Atlas V rocket from the United Launch Alliance is launching a missile-detecting satellite tonight out of the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida, while SpaceX is slated to launch a communications satellite on January 30th. The timing of both launches may mean they avoid the shutdown. But if they did occur during the shutdown, it's unclear if they would suffer delays.
It seems to me that private company launches are more important than ever. Once they're funded, the petty politics can't shut down or delay a launch. Space exploration could move on without D.C.
A) The economy is up under Trump more than any president since FDR. B) Even Apple is bringing back jobs. C) The Democrats and RiNO (McCain) caused the shutdown, the Republicans passed the budget. D) Figure out what's going on before speaking, you might come off as less of a moron.
That whooshing sound is the point passing way over your head. Let me explain the post you're replying to: The Republican Party controls both houses and the executive branch. How in the name of holy fuck is this the fault of Democrats?
Trump can't avoid a shutdown even when his own side controls everything.
Trump claims he wants Congress to pass a DACA deal. If funding the government is so important, then why let that stop you? Cut the deal, pass the budget, and move on.
They want to be able to pass the budget without a deal, just have the Dems roll over (which frankly they are pretty good at). Now that they're taking a page from the Rep's playbook, suddenly it's unfair.
Cry me a river, and then dump pollution in it.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
1.4 trillion in 10 years doesn't seem like that much given that Obama added 4 trillion in only 8 years.
It's not great, but it's definitely an improvement.
Trump can't avoid a shutdown even when his own side barely controls everything.
FTFY. The republicans hold 52 seats, and the democrats hold 46. The fact that this measure failed to pass is, I think, a good sign. It shows that both parties are willing to cross ranks when they feel that a given measure violates their personal convictions. That's far better than political flunkies just blindly following whatever their party decides.
For the record, the measure failed 50-49, with 5 republicans opposing it, and 5 democrats supporting it.
This outcome has done more to restore my faith in US politics than anything else has in a long time.
I don't think that's correct. There were 5 partial shutdowns (where employees weren't furloughed) between 1977 and 1979 where the democrats had full control under Carter.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Posting AC.
A: The economy was just as good under Obama, when he left. In fact, Obama presided over the worst economic time since the Great Depression and left with the Dow setting record highs.
B: The jobs are few and far between. For example, Apple's data center is run by a skeleton crew of maybe 15-20 people at most. Lets be real here. These jobs may benefit a few in California, but for 95% of the nation, it does not help them in the slightest. In fact, revenue just gets sucked off and stashed overseas, never to be seen in the US economy again. The people in Georgia, Alabama, Kentucky, and other places are still left high, dry, and unemployed.
C: Nope. The issue is more than that, mainly because the Republicans, with the majority they have, are unable to keep the government afloat. The Dems are a minority, and the (R)s and the (L)s masquerading as (R)s are in the driver's seat right now.
As for the economy, it has signs of faltering. The bond market is shaky with bear market predictions. Europe is on the cusp of a trade war, with Merkel denouncing the US, with damage to relations that has not been seen since the aftermath of WWII. The tax "cuts" that are supposedly coming will not be, because the IRS cannot recalculate W4 amounts right now.
Then, there are things like the "shithole" mess. This is one of the first times that a head of state called a sovereign country and its people such names, insulting them. This really fucks up years to decades of diplomacy.
Right now, the country is in free fall. The effects of Trump's idiocy are not felt yet, but when it does, it will be disastrous. The US cannot go at it alone, and Europe is already starting to look at new trade relationships with Russia and China.
tl;dr, the Dow is great now, but 1929 started out as a damn booming year as well.
We may disagree on whether or not he's a loser, but I'm glad that we can agree that him fixing America - intentionally or otherwise - would be a good thing. Far too many democrats seem like they would much prefer to have him destroy America so that their own biases can be shown to be right.
The Australian government can't shut down in practice, because in a "loss of supply" situation, the Prime Minister must resign or Parliament is dismissed and a fresh election is called for everyone, half term or not. (Or, if the PM chooses to do neither, be sacked as happened in 1975.)
Learn, guys. Politicians aren't so quick to block supply if they are the ones who are going to be stood down.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
lol. Whatever universe you are living in, I want to be there.
1.4 trillion in 10 years doesn't seem like that much given that Obama added 4 trillion in only 8 years.
Apples and oranges ... $1.5 trillion is the *additional increase* in the debt over the next ten years. Deficits were already projected to grow by $10 trillion over the next decade, now the projection is $11.5 trillion.
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
Also, according to this and a few other sources... you do seem to get paid back:
https://www.fool.com/investing...
""But just because workers are furloughed doesn't mean they'll go without pay. Once the government starts up again, most furloughed works will receive back pay for their time off. Bloomberg crunched the numbers and came up with a specific tab: $174 million per day the government is shut down. And this really is a cost, not just a reimbursement. Work that needs to get done (processing tax returns, issuing passports) piles up while employees are furloughed, creating a need for massive overtime once the government starts back up.""
So... is this wrong? This lines up rather cleanly with what everything costs after a shutdown. There are no savings. There are if anything costs. You say "we lose a week of pay"... tragic... so where is the savings off the federal balance sheet? It doesn't exist. So...
So... Sir, bullshit on YOU.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
https://www.fool.com/investing...
Who the hell do you think you're kidding?
Worst case you're going to get a bunch of overtime when it starts back up again which will level your pay back up.
I almost felt bad for a minute... I looked into it... maybe there is something going on with "you" but from what I can tell... the vast majority of workers that stay home during a shut down get paid back one way or another.
That you're telling me not to talk when you're wrong and I'm apparently right. Maybe you shouldn't talk if all you're going to do with the privilege is lie?
Just an idea.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
GOP House approved continuing resolution: 230–197 In the Senate, the GOP had 51, needed 60. Got 52. Almost all 49 Democrats voted against CR. Go on how this is a GOP shutdown.
Yeah - it tells me you are an idiot. He did that during one of the worst economic downturns in history - as a result - the US largely weathered the storm.
Trump did it while removing regulations that ensure you, and the rest of the world will suffer the consequences of the biggest economic crashes in a century. Right now you are in an âoeeverythingâ bubble - and Trump is doing his best to make sure wallstreet can maximize the damage inflicted should a crash occur.
And to the original point - most of those companies that have come out spruking their bonuses have also laid off hundreds of people at the same time (see Comcast and Verizon to name a few).
There was budget surpluses each year between 1998 and 2001, 2001 being the last year of Clinton's budgets. In 2002, the first year of Bush's budgets, we once again had a deficit.
In 2001, the projected 10 year surplus was ~5.6 trillion, with the national debt standing at ~5.7 trillion. That means, if the projection held true, we stood within 11 years of eliminating the national debt. And, of course, we remember what republicans did: a tax cut, a give away to big pharm, and two wars put straight onto the debt. Given the choice, republicans exploded the debt instead of paying it off. They actively chose to fuck over everyone except the 1%. And lets put this in perspective... that tax cut was supposed to cost 1.6 trillion over 10 years, but over just 8 years our debt exploded to 10.6 trillion... a 5 trillion dollar increase... BECAUSE republicans chose to say "the debt doesn't matter," right Dick.
https://www.cbpp.org/research/...
The Bush tax cuts are responsible for a full 1/3rd of our current national debt. You know, those tax cuts that republicans swore wer going to pay for themselves, increase growth, and increase revenue. And just as they did when Reagan passed his tax cut.... they didn't do anything the republicans swore they'd do. revenue fell (duh), growth was anemic at best (much slower job growth and slightly slower GDP growth than when Clinton was in office), and the national debt exploded.
And lets face it, this tax cut bullshit is ll based on Dick "the dick" Cheney's Laffer Curve which was never anything more than a line on a napkin...with no numbers attached. It was the basis for the supply-side economics bullshit that has driven this country into massive debt. Even the guy who developed it for Reagan says it doesn't work. But, true believes always have brown eyes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Quite simply put... there are no fiscally conservative republicans. All there is is a bunch of anti-federal government, anti-American politicians that are leeching everything they can out of this countries coffers for themselves and their wealthy benefactors.
Because, of course, while you have have republicans screaming about spending less, they're pushing through tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy: https://www.politico.com/story...
Reagan enacted two tax cuts, one in 1981, one in 1983. 11 tax increases later Bush Sr. was elected and he... raised taxes more.... then Clinton raised taxes a record with a record breaking increase. Net results after all those tax INCREASES.... longest period of growth in US history, and a budget surplus for 4 years. Took republicans less than 2 years to fuck it all up.
I've got a great idea... if this tax cut doesn't do what republicans say it is going to (which it wont, because they NEVER have), then every single congress person that voted for it, and every single citizen who voted in those congress people... every one of them should forfeit every single penny they have to pay for their fuckup. Reagan cut taxes, the debt exploded; Bush Jr cut taxes, the debt exploded; Who wants to bet on a 30 trillion national debt in 5 years?
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Trump did it while removing regulations that ensure you, and the rest of the world will suffer the consequences of the biggest economic crashes in a century.
Well that's awesome; I don't want to suffer the consequences of the biggest crash in centuries, so I'm glad to hear that Trump removed the regulations which guarantee I will. Nice to meet another Trump fan on here!
"He's going to die in prison."
Hardly. His LDL is 140 _with_ statin drugs, a few more months of 'winning' and 'fake news' and his heart will explode.
There is a better way to prevent shutdowns:
A) Fed no longer allowed to borrow any money
B) Fed adjusts taxes to match spending
Yep, it is just that simple. Spend only what you make. Chose your poison- either raise taxes or cut spending or both. And when they find that is really, really hard, then they should re-read the Constitution about what the Fed is supposed to doing (hint: probably 90% of the spending isn't really Constitutional).
The US had a month-long "shutdown", I believe, in the late 90's. Most of the federal government stopped working, except the military, FBI and federal hospitals. The vast majority of US citizens didn't notice a difference.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
In the Senate, it takes 60% (60 votes) to pass a bill, if any "one* Senator decides to stop the bill by filibuster.
The Democrats chose to filibuster and shut down the government unless DACA (immigration amnesty) was attached to the funding resolution.
Clearly you haven't been following this in detail.
The reason the Republicans need a supermajority is that they have not been able to keep enough of their own party together to get a regular appropriations bill passed. So they turned to a stop-gap parliamentary procedure called a "continuing resolution" in which both sides (a supermajority) agree to allow spending to continue while they work out their differences.
So this is all about making a deal with Democrats because they can't keep their own party together. In your system that would trigger an election.
Now as for immigration, a deal on the DACA program, which literally nine out of ten Americans favor, would bring enough Democrats over to pass the continuing resolution. But the Republicans added another condition to that: funding for the President's border wall, which if you recall Mexico was supposed to pay for.
So the Republican leadership has reached an impasse in which they can neither muster enough votes from their own party to pass a regular appropriations bill, nor enough votes from the opposition party to pass a continuing resolution.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Federal Government says you are wrong.
Total debt on Jan 21, 2009 (first day of the Obama presidency): $10,625,053,544,309.79.
Total debt on Jan 20, 2017 (last day of the Obama presidency):$19,947,304,555,212.49.
Total increase in debt during the Obama presidency: $9,322,251,010,902.70.
That's a pretty stiff increase, just about doubling the debt. Quite a bit different than a reduction, eh?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
There was budget surpluses each year between 1998 and 2001, 2001 being the last year of Clinton's budgets. In 2002, the first year of Bush's budgets, we once again had a deficit.
False. Please see the facts at the Federal Government itself. The national debt increased every single year since 1957. How does a debt increase if you have a surplus? Answer: it doesn't. The "surplus" was for a subsection of the entire national budget only. When you look at the entire, actual budget, we spent more than we brought in every single year since 1957. Proof? The national debt has increased every single year since then.
What Clinton did, was essentially ignore some of the spending. It would be like a person spending $7,000 per month, making $6,000 per month, and claiming they are actually cash-flow positive because they ignore the $2,000 per month in rent they pay. Hey, they only spent $5,000 per month on $6,000 revenue - if you ignore that $2,000 per month payment over there...
Smoke and mirrors. Completely false.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!