Slashdot Mirror


Shutdown Hits Industries Nationwide (wsj.com)

The partial government shutdown is affecting a wide range of business and financial concerns nationwide. From a report: Shuttered government offices are stalling the approval of new loans, initial public offerings, the processing of tax documents, and the approval of new products such as prescription drugs, among other effects. While some programs are reopening on a temporary basis or providing workarounds for affected companies, most services won't return to normal until the government fully reopens and 800,000 federal workers sift through the backlog.

Here is a round up of the impact: The partial closure of the Securities and Exchange Commission is delaying the ability of companies to open the IPO market. Companies that were seeking to list shares in January are delaying plans since the regulator has stopped reviewing and approving new and pending corporate registration statements. Airlines expect to have sluggish revenue growth in the first quarter in part because of revenue lost from government travel cancellations. Delta Air Lines Inc. Chief Executive Ed Bastian, for instance, said the shutdown would cost his airline $25 million in lost revenue from government travel. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has dramatically curtailed inspections of domestic facilities at food-processing companies during the shutdown, though unpaid inspectors have resumed work inspecting higher-risk products such as fresh fruits and vegetables, eggs, seafood and dairy products.

At the Internal Revenue Service, the shutdown has created delays in getting some employer identification numbers, holding up some routine business deals. Some small-business loans are also stuck in limbo. The Small Business Administration has stopped approving routine loans that the agency backs to ensure entrepreneurs have access to funds, halting their plans for expansion and repairs and forcing some owners to consider costlier sources of cash. The government process for reviewing proposed mergers has been slowed by the shutdown, but it is still operating. Businesses that have government contracts are feeling the strain across a variety of industries, including the building of highways and bridges.

664 comments

  1. Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    “I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it.”

    Donald Trump

    1. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe when you make $44,000 / year and refusing to pay any of the utility bills, buy gas for the car or give the kids milk money for school until the demand for the fence is dropped.

      I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car.

      In the mean time, blame who you want...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.

    3. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car."

      So, do we do that again when president toddler decides he wants 2 walls?

    4. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, yes, the "has the world ended" test, a very good and sensible way of judging governmental decisions.

    5. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because I skipped breakfast this morning, doesn't mean I can give up food all together if I want to continue living.

    6. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      start by cutting the DOD by 50%.

    7. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think blame is starting to shift towards Democrats who, morally outraged at what they feel is a waste of $5BN (despite the number of blue collar jobs that money will create), rejected out-of-hand, the President's offer to re-open government... Their reasons:

      - The wal! Is immoral, a waste of money
      - They want gov't open BEFORE they will discuss border security, not simultaneously
      - The proposed 3 year protections for TPS refugees (the T stands for Temporary, in case you didn't know) and DACA kids are too short

      Implied, but not mentioned specifically in the proposal, is that all furloughed federal employees will get immediate back pay for work missed.

      The Democrat position is going to crumble - POTUS will kick TPS and DACA out 3 years, or squarely into the first year of the next administration, and since Dems insist Trump won't be elected, what's their issue with fixing DACA and TPS in 2021?

      Ultimately, the Democrat position is that 800,000 federal workers have gone a month without pay to prevent gov't from 'wasting' $5BN in infrastructure spending.

      Trump should declare a crisis at the border, find the wall with defense department money, and then demand Democrats reopen gov't.

    8. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's making my work a pain in the ass, and I don't even work in the US. You know how many US organizations store the best datasets in the world for ocean modeling, and have to turn off their websites during a shutdown? Without archive.org I'd be having to sneakernet everything, and still there's a good amount of info that I can't get copies of right now.

    9. Re:Trump owns it by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion....

      5.7billion now (on top of nearly 2billion already granted in the budget to repair/replace existing border fencing) - and that's just the down payment to get started. Most conservative estimates start at about $20billion to complete the project- some go over $100billion (although that's probably unrealistic). Trump's own widely derided estimate was $7bn to $12bn total.

      Either way- that's not an insignificant chunk of money when you consider our infrastructure is in poor shape compared to much of the rest of the world, our health care is last place out of the industrialised world, we're falling behind in science, etc.

      The preferred designs can be cut through with common household tools or easily traversed with a ladder. Even republicans representatives who live along the border say that it wouldn't be effective. The people who cross the border illegally are fewer than the people who arrive legally and overstay their visa. ... and you know what country most people who arrive and legally overstay their visa come from? CANADA- it's not even Mexico.

      It's absurd to waste $5.7 billion on a downpayment on a much more expensive wall. It's just a really bad idea. It's a vanity project with no merit... let's not waste money on a stupid vanity project please.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    10. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.

      Ah.. So Democrats are now deficit hawks? Oh that's rich.. I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years and nobody on that side of the isle batting an eyelash about it. In fact, the ACA was projected to cost $1 Trillion over 10 years and established a new entitlement that would continue to suck federal funds FOREVER at an ever increasing cost per year. Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense. After that, you just have to maintain it which is a fraction of the original cost. But a wall is now too expensive? Not to mention that that IF we actually build the wall, we can make the money we spend on patrolling and protecting the border more effective, effectively reducing future costs.

      But we all know this isn't about the money. It never was about the money and arguing about it based on cost is not going to work out for those who oppose the wall.

      IF you are all upset over Trump trying to come back to congress for more wall funding, fund the whole thing, ONCE. Just offer him $200 Billion for a physical barrier on the border with the stipulation that it won't be repeated. He will take the deal for sure and I'll bet ya that he actually builds a wall with the cash this time.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    11. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope by sensible you mean trite

    12. Re:Trump owns it by stealth_finger · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trump offered to give Democrats everything they wanted and, thanks to TDS, they turned down his offer before they had even heard him make it.

      Apart from dropping the 5.7billion demand that mexico isn't paying for to build an ineffectual wall.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    13. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how do you imagine roads, traffic lights, electricity, internet, food quality, law enforcement, air quality, water quality would be like under that scenario? Do you think you will be able to buy gas at an affordable price?

    14. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years and nobody on that side of the isle batting an eyelash about it. "

      Well your memory is faulty then. We fought over that for over a decade. ACA is the watered down compromise that we got instead of the universal healthcare that everybody on the left actually wanted.

    15. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its too bad one cant tell the difference between projects that deserve funding and projects run by literally malicious actors

    16. Re:Trump owns it by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe when you make $44,000 / year and refusing to pay any of the utility bills, buy gas for the car or give the kids milk money for school until the demand for the fence is dropped.

      I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car.

      In the mean time, blame who you want...

      Yeah. 5.7 billion is nothing, just piss it all away because it's not the highest item on the balance sheet. Not to mention your total cost estimate is over tenfold inflated but whatever. Alt facts, eh?

      "In fiscal year 2015, the federal budget is $3.8 trillion." https://www.nationalpriorities...

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    17. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody turns off websites during a shutdown, you fucking liar.

    18. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".

      Who's zooming whom?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    19. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Exactly.

      800K federal workers saw trump true to end the shutdown, and democrats raced to the news cameras to reject it before they even heard the offer.

      When asked why they don't counter-offer, their basic response is to repeat the wall won't work, it's a waste of money.

      Imagine you are a furloughed federal worker, you haven't seen a paycheck since christmas, and you see Chuck and Nancy on TV explain that they are rejecting the offer to give you back pay because they are morally offended at the very idea of any additional border wall... Who would you blame for your continued situation?

    20. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of what you cite is handled at the local levels.

      The Feds are nothing but an impediment to fuel industry.

    21. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You can't possibly blame Trump

      Lol. He is 100% to blame. 110%.

      > This is now officially the Democrat's Shutdown

      Now, this is the Trump/McConnell shutdown. Stop your mental gymnastics.

    22. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know there's a big /slashdot at the end of your post. But it's almost definitely all the corporate tax cuts and big business subsidies, which keep us broke.

    23. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apart from dropping the 5.7billion demand that mexico isn't paying for to build an ineffectual wall.

      Of course he didn't drop it, that's not how you make deals, moron.

      Generally you start from a position of "I get everything I want, you get some of what you want" and then you let the other side make a counter offer where they accept less than what they want but offer you less than what you want. You continue this until everyone gets what they think is fair. Because President Trump knows the Democrats are literally insane at this point, he offered them everything they want in exchange for everything he wants, knowing they wouldn't even listen to it and try and make a counteroffer. And he was right. They didn't.

      The government will not reopen without at least some funding for the wall. It may not be the full $5.7 billion, but it will not reopen until Democrats agree to allow the wall - something that the majority of Americans support - to be built.

    24. Re:Trump owns it by r2kordmaa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trump is demanding for the one thing he has been publicly told he will not get. And he had two years to get it from GOP. If you think it's about money or the wall, you are completely missing the point. It's about who wears the pants. Trump deliberately set up the situation to show that he could demand whatever he wanted and get it. He expected Dems to just fold once he finished painting everyone in the corner and had no consideration on what to do in case Dems didn't fold. And now he has no idea on how to weasel out of the situation without folding himself.

    25. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boo-f'ing-Hoo - you freeload off of U.S. Gov't data and complain when the organization that provides it to you for free goes though some funding issues?

    26. Re:Trump owns it by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Opening the government is easy.
      Allow the spending plan that had previously pass both the House and Senate during a time with both sides were GOP controlled, that didn't have Wall spending.

      He did say that before it happened, then he let it happened, so he is responsible.

      Trump is hurting people and causing suffering, because he is having a fit, because the other areas of government doesn't want him to build a monument to causing suffering.

      The wall has nothing to do with border security. The cost of the wall far exceeds its overall benefit. Most of the crime that comes from the border comes from the legal ports of entry.

      Lets face it. If your goal is to be a criminal, and sell black market goods, your margins are rather slim, to risk your life wondering the desert or crossing tough mountains, or just having to traverse many miles to sell such goods. Just isn't worth it. You are better off risking a random check at the borders.

      Our national border, is protected by the fact there are wide areas of no infrastructure, making crossing such border a difficult action.

      The cost of such wall could be better used in different areas, including areas of border security which are better proven to work. The areas where there is a wall, isn't as much as a way to keep people out, but more to direct them to the legal ports of entry. Anyone can get over a wall. But if there is an easier option people will follow it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    27. Re:Trump owns it by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Save money by not changing the oil in your car. You may be able to get by expanding your change schedule, and perhaps missing a few change sessions. But if you go too long without change your oil. Your car will suffer more damage that is more expensive then those oil changes are.

      What is happening now, is we are starting to show the value of these "non-critical" government employees. While we can get by for a little while with out them, over time things just getting worse.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    28. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought you would see it that way

    29. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything Dems wanted? A temporary stay on Dreamers? Phf.

      Trump first put the dreamers in this position, then tries to use it as leverage for billions of dollars.

      Meanwhile, passing a clean spending bill without anyside getting anything but an open and functioing government will not be signed by Trump.
      Ergo it is Trumps fault.

    30. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about passing a clean bill instead of using working folk as hostages to get what you want?

    31. Re: Trump owns it by FuzzyDaddy2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But why now? He had two years with a republican congress, why didnâ(TM)t he build the wall then? He had the entire time leading up to the senates passage of legislation to push for or stand up for the wall. The reason we are shut down is he changed his mind at the last minute. He could have negotiated for his wall without causing all this damage.

    32. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The heart of the agenda is in rejecting the notion that trump is being unreasonable. Since not having a wall can be easily framed is oh its okay we donâ(TM)t need one by Democrats they can try to make it sound like trump is bad. We do need a wall. At some point people will begin to realize that democrats are holding up the budget in equal if not more ways than trump. They just have easier la gauge to use. Nobody ever stood up to them before and they dont know what they will do if it goes on any longer And if they open their mouths they worry that they will say something that makes people hear the truth

    33. Re: Trump owns it by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nope.
      Nothing stops the prez from signing a clean bill to reopen the government.
      He is taking hostages to get what he wants. Working them with no pay.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    34. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This is now officially the Democrat's Shutdown. They clearly have no intention of negotiating and no intention of trying to reopen the government.

      Trump clearly, and unambiguously, said that Mexico would pay for the wall. That was his campaign promise.

      The Democrats, while hardly perfect, are merely holding him up to that promise, by refusing to pay for the wall with tax payer money.

      ==

    35. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The United States Government does not negotiate with terrorists.

      If the Democrats cave now, they will set a precedent that the government can be held hostage over whatever new boondoggle wants the next time.

      This is about more than a wall or about reopening the government, it's about our government NOT using it's own citizens lives as bargaining chips.

      Anytime you see someone asking for more power, or strongarming the government by holding money, jobs, people, etc, hostage, ask yourself one question:

      "If was able to get away with this tactic, would I be happy?"

      Regardless of your opinion on Donald Trump, hinging our entire government on a single issue is a tactic I do NOT want to see made common in the future. The Democrats need to hold firm, that way this doesn't become the new normal.

    36. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually 4.4 Trillion, not 44. This is less of an issue over a fence to keep kids safe and more about buying useless plastic flamingos for the front yard that no one wants and won't do any good and will make the neighbours complain.

      Look, when your kid throws a tantrum in the grocery store because they want candy, the solution isn't to give in. If you do that the kid will always throw a fit whenever they want something. The correct response is to tell them to suck it up and take them out of the store. Congress shouldn't cave to Trump, they should impeach him.

    37. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".

      Who's zooming whom?

      AFTER a 15% tax cut remember... BUT you are mixing up your numbers. 1.1 Trillion is the increase in the national debt, of which only $799 Billion is from the budget deficit.

      But I have a question for ya... Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt? Where you upset with the ACA passing because of it's obvious costs? What about the QE1, QE2, QE3, and QEForever spending? Any of that bother you?

      As a % of GDP the debt is increasing, but at a lower rate of increase, since Trump took office. IF we are really worried about the federal debt, or even the budget deficit, what are YOU planning to put on the chopping block to balance the budget?

      IF you are really serious about this deficit and national debt thing, I expect you to act on this and start cutting the budget across the board too, not just complaining about how a one time $5.7 Billion is going to break us. Be consistent, act on what you claim to believe.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    38. Re: Trump owns it by FuzzyDaddy2 · · Score: 1

      Does this mean closing all the smithsonian museums and the national zoo? And stopping process tax returns? And stop airport security? And food inspections? The stuff that still going is being done by people who are not getting paid. Perhaps you would like them to keep working for free indefinitely?

    39. Re:Trump owns it by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well Trump claimed on national TV that he will own the shutdown. That was extremely stupid of him. Because of that the blame will go to him. Now don't expect any politician to actually care for who is getting hurt, they are all in to winning the next election.

      Now Trump is getting all the blame. The house of representatives, who had a big win (Many along districts along the border, where the wall is to be built) for the democrats, because people wanted to fight Trumps evil motives. The democrats have the ability to make Trump and the GOP suffer.

      Now that $57 on a 44k budget is a big deal. $44k isn't a lot to live on, and the $57 can go to useful things, like new clothing, healthier food, or just making this months rent.

      Also to note, the Tax Cut last year which was suppose to super charge the economy, kinda failed to do such. The Ultra rich who benefited the most, just bought back stock. They didn't reinvest in their company to make them grow. Other companies lowered the amount of raises, because of the extra money people got from taxes. So now we have less money for services. So it is like this guy who made 44k use to make 45k last year, and still had all the expenses. so the $57 is even more painful.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    40. Re:Trump owns it by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      I think that's the problem here. Every cycle we go through this. [Insert some topic] is being tied to "can we keep the government open?". The underlying issue is that the President de jure (being it Trump/Obama/Bush/Whomever) is taking a topic that requires a lot of debate and discussion and attaching it to the topic of "can we keep the government open." Really we have two issues here.

      One, can you get the one big thing you promised in your campaign done? Two, can you maintain the government as it is currently funded? Recent Presidents and Congresses seem have taken the tactic of taking the first topic and making it hinge on the second. The thing is that each political party has made whatever their topic of the current cycle so amped up, that they see combining the two different topics into a single unified topic as justifiable. Ultimately, whatever uber hyped piece of whatever one gets passed, because of the super hype only ensures its demise the second the tables turn.

      I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car.

      The only problem is that just as soon as we write the check, that's just opening up the actual "work on putting the fence up" to be put on forever repeating delay. And then as soon as the winds change the fence idea just fades away as quickly as the keep the medicine cabinet stocked idea faded. At some point I think we'll begin to understand that holding a hostage the gas and milk money is an incredibly ineffective idea. Until that time, we're just going to have this same thing happen over and over and the details of how much, who supports, and long term effects of doing that will all just be damned.

      Ultimately both Congress leadership and the President ought to be tossed out for any shutdown. A shutdown should cost them all their jobs the second the government is opened back up. Keeping the government open, no strings attached, should be the MO of our government and it isn't because we keep taking voter issues and connecting them to fiscal suicide. This current shutdown only emboldens the next person in office to do a shutdown of whatever length this one is minus one day. I may soften my tone the second the US government realizes how stupid it is to do shutdowns much like how they had to learn that lesson in 1879 with Rutherford B Hayes. Till then, fuck them all for shutting it down, all leadership deserves to loose their jobs for this.

      It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe

      Also, we have a nasty habit in this country of doing things half assed. I've seen promises of "We're not going to pass new taxes", "We're going to fight this war to make America safe", "We're going to fully fund infrastructure", or "We're going to pass this to make medicine in America affordable". I am willing to bet the farm that this "We're going to build a wall to keep us safe" is going to be right up there with the other four I've mentioned. So if the idea is we only need a fence to keep the kids safe, we might want to go ahead and kiss the kids good-bye. Let's be clear that $57 is just a drop in a bucket of potential shutdowns to come. So let's not pretend that we're just talking about $57. That $57 isn't "Let's end the fight." That $57 is "Let's pick up the pace on shutdowns." The second we write the $57 check, we might want to go ahead and get ready for the shutdown over the $87 check for whatever reason. Just as soon as that's written, we'll need to get ready for the shutdown over the $112 check for whatever reason the next guy in office comes up with, rise and repeat. We the public should really rethink normalizing this kind of behavior no matter what party is behind the desk in the White House.

    41. Re:Trump owns it by gtall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It doesn't matter why he said it, it matters that he said he'd take the blame for shutting down the government because holding his breath wasn't working.

      Trump also didn't give the Democrats anything near what they wanted. He only promised to kick the DACA can down the road for 3 years, and this after he's trying to cancel the program outright. Last we hear, the Supreme Court was indicating it won't take the appeal from a lower court going against Trump. The Democrats want to make the DACAs citizens.

      And building some goddamn Great White Wall while lying about how it will stop illegal immigration ignores the fact that most of the people crossing the southern border are coming the legal entry points and requesting asylum to escape the drug gangs who help fill America's illegal drug appetite. It also won't stop the drugs which don't come across barren stretches of border, they come though on the usual trade routes...that is the ones that are not manufactured by Americans.

      What's that moron going to do, govern by fake National Emergency and threat budget bills because he got that morning and discovered a fly in his McMuffin? If the Congress doesn't want to fund the Great White Wall, then it shouldn't get funded. They have the power of the purse strings as provided by the Constitution.

      The only reason he wants that wall is because he promised he'd get one. That promise was pitched to him by his campaign advisors who admitted they needed something simple he could understand and pitch. But Trump never just pitches anything. He decorates his pitch so much so that it cannot possibly do whatever the core underlying idea would have done. He just makes shit up because it crosses his mind while his mouth is open.

    42. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What laughable bullshit

      There was a bill that the President agreed to sign, which included $1.6B for border security, then he changed his mind and got Ryan to craft a pos with 5.7B for Trump's wall

      Of course it didn't go anywhere, you do not take months of negotiations and then change it at the last minute and expect it to go anywhere

      Trump owns this, lock, stock and barrel.

      The thing is that Trump has NO IDEA what is bad about shutting down the government, it is a "nothing burger" to him, and the opinions of his right wing talking heads weigh much more heavily than the concerns of 300M Americans

    43. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Ah, so deficits are NOT really an issue for you. IF you agree with the issue the money is being spent on, you are more than ready to borrow the money and cut the check.

      Logical Consistency is a cruel task master. IF you are OK with the ACA's cost, stop your whining about deficits and cut Trump his $5.7 Billion check.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    44. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody turns off websites during a shutdown,

      And nobody get them up again when they fall to ddos, viruses or hacking. If anyone wants to deface public-funded American websites - this is the time.

    45. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      So.. You are OK with putting the checkbook on pause over $58?

      Ok, but let's be honest about this. It's not about the deficit, this isn't a money question. This is about votes. The 800K people who are missing their paychecks are but pawns in this vote getting game. The 800K folks are hostages.... What are you going to do?

      The deficit argument is a red herring for your side, that's obvious to me. You need to come up with something else because last week we spent more than $58 on eating out and soda pop.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    46. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's easy, because the Republicans don't want the wall either. I honestly can't remember, did the GOP ever even deliver him a budget to veto? I know they were getting shot down by the senate even before they made it to him. If GOP congress, with a GOP senate and a GOP president can't pass a budget, I fear this will be a very long shutdown.

      I do wonder just how divided can things get before they just implode?

    47. Re:Trump owns it by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I never thought I'd live in a time when a US prez needs a spanking. That's at least the usual cure for a sullen kid in the terrible two that throws a tantrum for not getting the toy he wants.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    48. Re:Trump owns it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Sure, buddy. $5.7B for what amounts to 1919 (or 1819, or 1719, you get the idea) 'border security' technology, when what we need is 2019 border security technology. We could spend a fraction of that on cutting-edge detection technology devices, and maybe some on additional personnel to patrol for when crossings are detected, and have better overall broder security than some stupid-ass wall that they'll climb over, fly over, or tunnel under. Futhermore, high-tech solutions to border security can be deployed in a fraction of the time it takes to build a wall, and also won't require invoking Eminent Domain on people's private property.

    49. Re:Trump owns it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Umm.. I think you meant "$4.407 trillion".

    50. Re:Trump owns it by bryanbrunton · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am okay with the costs of the ACA. Because moving to a public healthcare system would be cheaper than the current corporate system.

      The rest of the world has proven that to be true. Only in the backwards USA do Republican morons dispute what the rest of the world has figured out.

    51. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sets a poor precident. If we are willing to shut down for a month everything any president doesn't get their way the government will never be open for long. In negotiation you don't get anything until you let the hostages go.

    52. Re: Trump owns it by reanjr · · Score: 2

      You can't possibly expect Democrats to accept any "deal" in which American money is spent on a border wall. Trump should be held to his promises, and he promised Mexico would pay.

    53. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody are deficit hawks now. Republicans absolutely exploded the deficit with these tax cuts. Hell at least democrats try to blow up deficits on people who need help, not hand out money to companies that don't need it. Don't believe me? The money saved was largely used for stock buybacks.

      But neither party gives two shits about the deficit. But since 1980 only democrats have actually made it smaller by the end of their term. So by that extremely low bar, they are the hawks. Republicans only care because it's mechanism to obstruct.

    54. Re:Trump owns it by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      IF I was a democrat, I'd recommend that you not use the "we cannot afford this" argument card.

      The effective approach for a politician to use is to declare as many varied different reasons as possible, without worrying if they are true or not, because someone will believe it, and your opponents will be distracted by spending all their time fact checking.

      Besides, if you have enough reasons, most people eventually will stop listening and think, "Oh, he has that many reasons, it must be true." It's a fallacy, but an effective one politicians should know if they're trying to get their way.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    55. Re:Trump owns it by bryanbrunton · · Score: 0

      Trump Traitor, you lack a basic understanding of how the US government functions. It's not about the $58.

      It's about now allowing a President to close the government unless he gets specific funding on a controversial (not publicly supported) budgetary item (the wall).

      The United States of America has never worked like that.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    56. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the ACA is healthcare and actually benefits our citizens. The wall, on the other hand, is a bigly wall Trumpy can stick his name on and call his. The reality is that most illegal immigrants fly into the US and overstay their visas. El Chapo traffickers testified during a trial stating most drugs are imported to the US through LEGAL ports of entry. A wall isn't going to do shit but waste money.

      BTW, wasn't Mexico supposed to pay for it? Wonder where that went...

    57. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This story is going to be 80-90% anonymous cowards and suspiciously partisan but otherwise political only posters. The nutjobs on one side will also be here, recycling their long debunked arguments.

      The facts don't matter.

      For the honest folks who think maybe we should give in to a terrorist out of expediency now.... What is worse a 2-3 month shutdown, or 2-3 separate shutdowns of a month and a half each, followed by a six month one in 2020.

    58. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using your power to cause the shutdown until you get what you want and refusing accept no, is not negotiating. Its called holding you hostage until you agree to my demands.

      If the Democrats caved in then the next time Frump wanted something then he will just do this again.

      Frump is getting hosed in the polls anyways, and shutdowns are blamed on the sitting president.

      Looks like Frump has backed himself into a corner and is going to have to eat crow.

    59. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works for climate change deniers.

    60. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, in the real world, an *increasing* fraction of Americans blame Trump for the shutdown.

      I know it's nicer to live in the world inside your head, what with all the room you have in there, but the rest of us are happier outside, where we don't get shit on our shoes.

    61. Re:Trump owns it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I never thought I'd live in a time when a US prez needs a spanking. That's at least the usual cure for a sullen kid in the terrible two that throws a tantrum for not getting the toy he wants.

      The problem is, Trump likes getting spanked. The spanking is the toy. But if you do it, he'll only expect you to do it again.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    62. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that means everytime you want a few dollars, to your way you just stop paying the bills, that way you can get what you want no matter how stupid the request.

      Anyone with an ounce of self respect doesnt give into hostage demands taking they know where it leads.

    63. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and you'll learn to love it too. Next question

    64. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1, Troll

      Sure, buddy. $5.7B for what amounts to 1919 (or 1819, or 1719, you get the idea) 'border security' technology, when what we need is 2019 border security technology. We could spend a fraction of that on cutting-edge detection technology devices, and maybe some on additional personnel to patrol for when crossings are detected, and have better overall broder security than some stupid-ass wall that they'll climb over, fly over, or tunnel under. Futhermore, high-tech solutions to border security can be deployed in a fraction of the time it takes to build a wall, and also won't require invoking Eminent Domain on people's private property.

      Ah, the "physical barriers don't work" argument. This is patently false and obviously not valid. Physical barriers DO work, which is why we already have them in many locations (such as along the southern border of California.) They OBVIOUSLY work better than a three barbed wire fence and a drone....

      Look, you want to make the argument that because it's not perfect, it's not good. You make the perfect the enemy of the good, so you advocate we do nothing? I'm sorry, a physical barrier DOES help the situation by making it more difficult to just walk across the border willy nilly. It make the application of technology more effective by slowing down illegal entries and making the job harder.

      Just having to build the tunnel slows down the illegals. Having to climb it, slows them down, buying an airplane ticket won't help.

      I'd sat that if a property owner doesn't want the wall (a situation I would consider rare) we can do multiple things. 1. Just build the wall with them on the Mexico side (grin) and leave them to their own devices.. 2. Build the wall where the land owners allow it, funneling the illegals across their property and the damage these folks do. I have a feeling you will find that most land owners won't mind letting the wall get built....

      So you need a better argument...

      Remember.... The REAL issue here isn't about the money. It's about votes and who's going to control things after 2020. So the 800K folks who are basically unemployed are pawns in a political game. All over $5.7 billion... Looking long term, how do you think this will play out?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    65. Re:Trump owns it by nuckfuts · · Score: 1

      A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.

      Ah.. So Democrats are now deficit hawks? Oh that's rich.. I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years and nobody on that side of the isle batting an eyelash about it. In fact, the ACA was projected to cost $1 Trillion over 10 years and established a new entitlement that would continue to suck federal funds FOREVER at an ever increasing cost per year. Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense. After that, you just have to maintain it which is a fraction of the original cost. But a wall is now too expensive? Not to mention that that IF we actually build the wall, we can make the money we spend on patrolling and protecting the border more effective, effectively reducing future costs.

      But we all know this isn't about the money. It never was about the money and arguing about it based on cost is not going to work out for those who oppose the wall.

      IF you are all upset over Trump trying to come back to congress for more wall funding, fund the whole thing, ONCE. Just offer him $200 Billion for a physical barrier on the border with the stipulation that it won't be repeated. He will take the deal for sure and I'll bet ya that he actually builds a wall with the cash this time.

      You're ignoring the statement you're replying to. It's not a complaint about spending. It's a complaint about spending on something with zero value.

    66. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feel free to donate money to the gofundme wall page. I won't, so you can just donate an extra $57 to cover my share. It's only $57. Ditto for everyone else who doesn't want to pay. It's only $57 after all.

      Trump promised Mexico would pay for it, "a five to ten billion dollar one time payment" , " it might even be a check". So Trump will repay you once Mexico pays, since he is so well known for paying his debtors and keeping promises.

    67. Re:Trump owns it by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      Seriously? Give the guy his $100 Billion and be done with him

      No! That's a ridiculous waste of money. Do you realize how many roads, bridges, and other infrastructure projects could be completed with that?

      Oh wait.. This ISN'T about the money is it? Democrats dropped $1 Trillion over 10 years on the ACA with a continued ever increasing entitlement without batting an eyelash

      I have no idea how much the democrats spent on it, but it is irrelevant. I don't generally view the Democrats as money savvy anyway. Once upon a time that used to be the realm of the Republican party. Although, they've always wasted a lot on military spending too over the years.

      It is a fallacy to throw good money after bad, to say, we've wasted this much money, might as well waste more on Trump's vanity project. How does wasting more money help the money that was wasted in the past?

      Building the wall doesn't do any of those things. It's just a vanity project. He could spend $2million to build a "Statue of Trump" to stand alongside the Statue of Liberty? Less money of the tax payer wasted and he gets a vanity project in.

      The reality is this expenditure is a way to save money over the decades to come,

      By having to spend billions through the years replacing sections that get cut through with household tools? Build a wall and it either gets breached in the first few weeks and then is worthless, or you throw millions and billions at it every few years to keep it repaired and up to date. This is a never-ending money pit.

      Would be much more efficient to just set up surveillance equipment- equipment to monitor where people are by heat, movement, etc. Make an electronic wall- it will cost less, be useful to border patrol, and if/when it needs replacing, it will be cheaper and as it gets replaced it gets upgraded. If this were about security, we'd listen to all the experts who say an electronic wall would be cheaper and more efficient instead of going after Trump's vanity project.

      Plus the lives saved alone (Both the illegals who die trying to cross the border and those who die from the drugs disease that illegally cross the border) would be worth every penny.

      More would die because they would take a sea route instead (see Europe). Drugs wouldn't be impacted because over 90% already comes through legal ports/border crossings. If drugs were the reason, you'd just better man existing ports of entry. Besides, you don't think drones can fly over a 30ft wall? Or that people can't catapult them over the wall? Don't be naive, we've had the ability to throw things over a 30ft wall for 2000+ years.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    68. Re:Trump owns it by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Up the ante, use paddles.

      Then stones.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    69. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All trump has to do is wait. The longer the shutdown goes on, the worse the dems look. He made the offer to give them what they wanted and they didnâ(TM)t even listen before rejecting it. The dems seem more focused on winning the small battles rather than the war.

    70. Re: Trump owns it by Curtman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Disclaimer: Canadian Commenter

      I'm confused, is this the wall that Mexico is paying for? Because we're having border security issues up here with people fleeing the U.S.. We're anxiously awaiting how this all turns out.

    71. Re:Trump owns it by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years

      Plenty of other countries have something similar, yet still do so more cheaply than in the US. Whatever is causing it to be expensive is specific to the good old USA.

      Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense.

      The Berlin Wall needed more than just that one time expense. For it to be useful, the wall needed patrols, maintenance crews, and political clout to ensure it didn't get dismantled by a mob - all of which have a continuous expense. Should it last long enough or otherwise becomes historically important, it becomes a historical structure and requires special crews designed to manage them, creating a further expense. If it's an eyesore, a future government needs an expense to take it down (or at the very least, the manpower expense of people who could have been doing something better.)

      Not to mention that the wall itself is an ongoing expense because it represents that the USA isn't as good of a trading partner as it used to be.

      IF you are all upset over Trump trying to come back to congress for more wall funding, fund the whole thing, ONCE.

      Trump made a campaign promise that Mexico would fund the wall.

    72. Re:Trump owns it by o_ferguson · · Score: 1

      When you're in the position of power, there's no impetus to make a deal, so they are not.

      --
      - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
    73. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The wall has nothing to do with border security. The cost of the wall far exceeds its overall benefit. Most of the crime that comes from the border comes from the legal ports of entry.

      The wall (actually the disconnected segments of barriers spread across the 2,000 mile southern border) will direct border crossers to legal ports of entry.

      Lets face it. If your goal is to be a criminal, and sell black market goods, your margins are rather slim, to risk your life wondering the desert or crossing tough mountains, or just having to traverse many miles to sell such goods. Just isn't worth it. You are better off risking a random check at the borders.

      You obviously don't understand the criminal mind - loading your pockets/car/truck with illegal goods and driving to a border control station isn't a smuggler's first choice. The reason smugglers funnel through legal ports of entry is because existing walls make cross desert travel much more dangerous, encouraging them to attempt to get past the border control agents.

      --
      Ken
    74. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.

      Ah.. So Democrats are now deficit hawks? Oh that's rich..

      Believe it or not, but historically, that is absolutely correct. You can look it up. For a start, they don't waste enormous piles of money on useless and illegal wars, or tax cuts for the super-rich.

    75. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1, Informative

      Trump also didn't give the Democrats anything near what they wanted. He only promised to kick the DACA can down the road for 3 years, and this after he's trying to cancel the program outright.

      When Trump ended the "created out of whole cloth" DACA program it was hot on the heels of the finding that the related DAPA (Dreamer parent program) was unconstitutional and about a dozen states were lining up to challenge DACA with the same argument, and there was every indication it too would be found unconstitutional. Trump pre-emptively announced an end date, giving Congress time to propose an alternative. Congress failed to do so, and the program expired when Congress failed to come up with an alternative. You may recall the President offered protection to 1.7 million DACA enrollees and future enrollees, but Democrats refused to accept that offer.

      Democrats have been demanding "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" for the past twenty years, using that as an excuse to refuse any incremental improvement to our current immigration policy, yet they never put forth their "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" bill, under either Republican/Democrat administrations.

      --
      Ken
    76. Re:Trump owns it by bryanbrunton · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hitler declared a national emergency after he had someone burn down the German congressional building. You Trump Traitors don't understand that government by national emergency is not how the United States of America functions.

      Trump's national emergency would immediately be tied up in the courts.

      Presidents don't close the government because they don't funding on specific budgetary items. I suppose in the backward racist world of Trump supporters that is how government should function.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    77. Re: Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      And Obama promised our healthcare costs wouldn't go up, we could keep our doctors/health plans, and that PPACA (ObamaCare) "wouldn't add one thin dime to the debt."

      So what? Politicians make statements on the campaign trail that they fail to live up to - that's worth shutting down the government for a month?

      --
      Ken
    78. Re: Trump owns it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Because we're having border security issues up here with people fleeing the U.S.. We're anxiously awaiting how this all turns out.

      Just like the US should be glad to have people fleeing violence and seeking a better life instead of participating in it, so should Canada. I've never understood why people would rant at any sort of travelers about how bad their country is. No shit, they left it, remember?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    79. Re:Trump owns it by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Not paddles. Jump rope.
      Most certainly not enjoyable.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    80. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was before the house passed the wall funding, as Nancy claimed Trump could not get done with the Republican House. Trump did it, knowing it wouldn't change their minds, just put the lie to their claim.

    81. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, so deficits are NOT really an issue for you. IF you agree with the issue the money is being spent on, you are more than ready to borrow the money and cut the check.

      Or, roll back the tax-cut that shouldn't have been done in the first place.

    82. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are illegal drugs in prison. Prisons have walls, and fences and guards 24/7. Walls don't stop drugs from getting into prisons.

      What drugs are you smoking that you think a wall in the desert is going to stop drugs from getting into the country?

      Or do you not really care about the drug argument?

      Could it be yiu, bobbies, are a hypocrite, liar and troll?

    83. Re:Trump owns it by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      And you're surprised that Donnie was lying? He's done nothing but try to blame others.

    84. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Multiple Bill's to reopen the government have passed the house. The Senate aren't bringing them to a vote.

    85. Re: Trump owns it by pnutjam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone who's dealt with a toddlers temper tantrum knows giving in the first time is a mistake.

    86. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Building the wall is like the only thing goverment should be entitled to do - protect homeland's territory.

    87. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense. After that, you just have to maintain it which is a fraction of the original cost. But a wall is now too expensive? Not to mention that that IF we actually build the wall, we can make the money we spend on patrolling and protecting the border more effective, effectively reducing future costs.

      But we all know this isn't about the money. It never was about the money and arguing about it based on cost is not going to work out for those who oppose the wall.

      THANK YOU. Concrete structures can last over 100 years. The Edison concrete houses are over 100 years old. There are other old concrete structures still standing. There are >10 million illegal aliens in the USA. Funding a few hundred thousand ICE agents would be a rational response. An ICE agent can be expected to cost ~$150,000/year. So, real immigration enforcement would run ~$50 billion/year, for over a decade, or more.

      So, a wall is cheaper.

    88. Re:Trump owns it by rikkards · · Score: 1

      The GOP do NOT want that to happen. It will set a precedent the next time a leftleaning president wants to do something, i.e. national health crisis, gun control crisis.

    89. Re:Trump owns it by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Too early, there's still hope that he learns. Besides, the rope is used on another body part.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    90. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Psst. Trump doesn't give two shits about the border wall.

      What Trump really wants is to stop the flow of illegal immigrants from entering this country. Sure, a wall might slow them down, but the other way to prevent them from coming is to put an end to all the entitlement programs that make it lucrative for those immigrants to come here in the first place.

      Starting in March, if the Democrats allow the shutdown to continue that long, SNAP/EBT will cease to function. Without free handouts, illegal immigrants will stop coming even without building a wall.

    91. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      By having to spend billions through the years replacing sections that get cut through with household tools?

      Please, describe these "household" tools that can cut though steel. I'm not saying the steel can't be breeched, I'm saying it can't be done with what the average person keeps in their house.

      Build a wall and it either gets breached in the first few weeks and then is worthless, or you throw millions and billions at it every few years to keep it repaired and up to date. This is a never-ending money pit.

      Really? It will take BILLIONS of dollar/year to maintain a wall that cost a few BILLION to build? You're just inventing outlandish numbers.

      We have several hundred (700, IIRC) miles of existing fencing, what is the annual cost to repair and maintain it? Seems to me the cost is known, and easily calculated by anyone interested in a honest debate of the cost, as opposed to a Carl Sagan-like debate about "billions and billions".

      --
      Ken
    92. Re:Trump owns it by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with waiting periods for non-essential procedures as long as more important stuff that's necessary for life is covered quickly. Government budget limits sound like lifetime caps, something only abolished under Obama, but which the GOP wants to reinstate. It's not the responsibility of the average US citizen to subsidize healthcare R&D for the rest of the world (nor things like defense of South Korea, for that matter).

    93. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      We spend $4.4 Trillion/year, and borrow about $800 Billion/year to make up for spending that outstrips receipts.

      Question, how long must the federal government be "shutdown" until the back-pay, for no work, exceeds the $5 Billion the President wants? In the not too-distant future, Democrats will approve spending $5BN on workers that did nothing, to avoid paying $5BN employing workers to build the wall segments Trump wants.

      --
      Ken
    94. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If if there is a physical barrier and it did work, how could there be a crisis at the border which needs an emergency infusion of cash to do something, anything, just to make Trump look good?

      Oh wait. There isn't any need for any of that.

      Sorry, but we don't need Trump or his wall. He can resign now and spare us.

    95. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good, I hope he keeps it closed. If the Democrats are hell-bent on letting Illegal immigrants cross over into our border, then that's Civil War by act of insurrection to keep the POTUS from doing his constitutional duties - SUCH AS PROTECTING THE BORDER you fucking shit-for-brains!

    96. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump controls the Republican held Senate. If the Democrats in the House want the Senate to bring anything to vote, they're going to have to strike a deal with Trump.

    97. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      I'll let Kipling explain that to you.

    98. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      Now that $57 on a 44k budget is a big deal. $44k isn't a lot to live on, and the $57 can go to useful things, like new clothing, healthier food, or just making this months rent.

      Shut up, you're being stupid.

      It's 0.1% of your income at $44K/yr. It's ONE DOLLAR/WEEK. How much clothing, "healthier food" can you buy for $1/week?

      Someone that makes $44K/yr, earns about $900/wk - you're saying $1 more, making it $901 would lead to a profound life change?

      I'm reminded of the Democrats arguing that $20/week was a life-changing amount for most Americans under the Obama Administration, but then turned around and called the Trump tax cuts "peanuts" and ran last year on a platform of taking away those "crumbs".

      Do the Democrats not understand that financial windfall even one mere dollar/week (nearly 2.5 cents/hour for a full-time worker!) represents?

      --
      Ken
    99. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      Ok, but let's be honest about this. It's not about the deficit, this isn't a money question. This is about votes. The 800K people who are missing their paychecks are but pawns in this vote getting game. The 800K folks are hostages.... What are you going to do?

      The vast majority of government workers are Democrats, so Republicans don't "lose" voters with the shutdown from the furloughed workers.

      Politically, this only hurts Democrats, since their supporters are the only ones suffering right now.

      --
      Ken
    100. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      Trump's proposal include money for increased technology at the border ports of entry, additional judges to address the multi-year backlog of immigration cases, and improvements to immigration facilities.

      But you don't know that because Democrats were too busy rejecting the proposal before he ever offered it.

      --
      Ken
    101. Re:Trump owns it by kenh · · Score: 1

      We could spend a fraction of that on cutting-edge detection technology devices, and maybe some on additional personnel to patrol for when crossings are detected, and have better overall broder security than some stupid-ass wall that they'll climb over, fly over, or tunnel under.

      So, why don't Democrats propose tearing down all existing wall segments, thereby saving us the on-going expense of repairing and maintain the wall segments we have? I mean, why keep wasting money repairing the existing wall, now that we know they are 100% ineffective.

      --
      Ken
    102. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's not 5.7 billion dollars total. that's barely a fucking down payment. estimates have the final cost, including acquisition of lands, building of supporting infrastructure, and the wall itself at well over 100 billion. trump wants this 'small' bit so he can 'justify' doing the same fucking thing for the rest.

      trump and mcconnell can fuck themselves with a rusty sickle.

    103. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the argument. The Argument is that it's too much money to just flush down the toilet on an ineffective vanity project.

      For example, $500. Not a crazy lot of money, but it's more than lunch money (for most people). $500 is not a lot to pay for a functional laptop to replace one on it's last legs. OTOH, it's a hell of a lot to pay for a spoiled ham sandwich out of a vending machine.

      I have enough to buy the laptop if I need it. I don't have enough to pay the same amount for a spoiled ham sandwich out of a vending machine.

    104. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Coming in March, if the Democrats allow the shutdown to continue, the SNAP/EBT system will shut off. The Democrats will be alienating their base. Best of luck to them in 2020!

    105. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the Democrats want is no wall, so start negotiations with that.

    106. Re:Trump owns it by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      You ever see what happens when children are rewarded for misbehaving?

      Don't negotiate with terrorists.

    107. Re:Trump owns it by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      why don't Democrats propose tearing down all existing wall segments, thereby saving us the on-going expense of repairing and maintain the wall segments we have?

      Most of the unauthorized immigrants are simply visa overstays. Many of the border crossers are migrant workers, and were coming and going until new security measures caused them to come and stay--increasing the unauthorized resident population. The drug lords and human traffickers build tunnels 90 feet below ground, under any wall.

      The most-effective way to handle all this is to automatically renew any visa without cause to cancel; increase quotas and streamline the process of authorizing seasonal migrant workers; provide economic relief and development of the border towns in Mexico; eliminate the walls, aside from fences there more as a demarcation guide for importation of goods than any serious attempt to stop anyone; and establish a North American Compact allowing anyone granted pass into any of the US, Canada, or Mexico to freely move between any and allowing labor to move freely across borders.

      Can you imagine the political impact of proposing this? Even the Democrats don't actually want to go that far, although they should.

    108. Re:Trump owns it by thejam · · Score: 1

      These things would go along much as they did in the 19th century, when the federal government was not involved: people would vote with their dollars and their actions, and USA went from a poor country to a rich one, despite a civil war. People don't tend to go to restaurants that have a reputation for serving food that makes people sick, so poor food quality doesn't survive. Knowing that there's no paternalistic savior to protect you, you've got to look out for yourself and your interests, so you don't put just any old food in your mouth. You ask around, you behave cautiously, and once you a felt the waters out, only then do you embrace new things. You know, like any mature adult. Having the government always act like the parent makes us children, and that isn't fine by me. Nowadays we have allowed the government to provide us with the illusion that we can engage in risky behavior and all will be fine.

    109. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump can declare a national emergency at the border and direct the Pentagon to redirect funds to wall construction - and with that Trump gets to build the wall, as promised.

      He could try. Then Congress would vote on whether it was, in fact one, and that would put him on the spot for an inquiry which would reveal that the Pentagon and the joint chiefs don't think this whole nonsense is a good idea let alone how they would want to spend money.

    110. Re:Trump owns it by r2kordmaa · · Score: 1

      If it's such a convenient solution, why did he back down from using it then? Because it's a stupid idea and someone clued him in, that's why.

    111. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 2

      Imagine how quickly things will go down hill when the indentured servants guarding the prisons and managing air traffic decide they've had enough or just plain don't have enough money to fill the tank for their daily commute!

      I wonder how Mr. Border Security will feel when the same happens with Border Patrol agents?

      Honestly, their respective unions should get together and give the Senate and President a hard deadline.

    112. Re: Trump owns it by DaveSewhuk · · Score: 1

      That's easy, because the Republicans don't want the wall either. I honestly can't remember, did the GOP ever even deliver him a budget to veto? I know they were getting shot down by the senate even before they made it to him. If GOP congress, with a GOP senate and a GOP president can't pass a budget, I fear this will be a very long shutdown.

      I do wonder just how divided can things get before they just implode?

      You forget the R(ussian) Party's other branch, Faux News (Hannity, Coulter, ....) didn't like the end of year resolution. Dems have been burned too many times. See 2017 DACA deal: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

    113. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baloney... Those same Democrats voted in favor of spending money for a wall back before Trump became President. Democrats are ALWAYS in favor of spending money, up until TRUMP wants something. Then its all, "Trump is an evil traitor colluding with Russia. Resist at all costs!"

    114. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Climate change believers should be LOVIN' this gov't shutdown. When the EBT/SNAP payments shut down in March, people gonna STARVE. Agenda 21 FTW!

    115. Re:Trump owns it by yodleboy · · Score: 1

      "Look, you want to make the argument that because it's not perfect, it's not good"
       
      You just recited the democrat's motto. Unless they get a perfect solution they oppose just about any solution. You must always satisfy every interest.
       
      Give him the money. Let him build the wall. If it works out, great for everyone. If it doesn't, well Republicans will pay the price at the next elections. It's not as if that money is going to be spent on anything else of value. It will be pissed away on some other feel good project or pork and most of it will never be used for the purpose it was allocated for.
       
      I have relatives working for the govt. They are worried more about their rapidly dwindling savings than border walls, DACA or political posturing from either side.

    116. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nancy Pelosi once said the very best use of federal dollars was to pay unemployed workers benefits, because every dollar creates several dollar of economic activity... Why is it any different with infrastructure project? If handing money to people is so great, why is it worse if we ask them to actually do something while we pay them?

    117. Re:Trump owns it by jbengt · · Score: 1

      BUT you are mixing up your numbers. 1.1 Trillion is the increase in the national debt, of which only $799 Billion is from the budget deficit.

      Huh?

    118. Re:Trump owns it by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      By having to spend billions through the years replacing sections that get cut through with household tools?

      Please, describe these "household" tools that can cut though steel. I'm not saying the steel can't be breeched, I'm saying it can't be done with what the average person keeps in their house.

      Build a wall and it either gets breached in the first few weeks and then is worthless, or you throw millions and billions at it every few years to keep it repaired and up to date. This is a never-ending money pit.

      Really? It will take BILLIONS of dollar/year to maintain a wall that cost a few BILLION to build? You're just inventing outlandish numbers.

      We have several hundred (700, IIRC) miles of existing fencing, what is the annual cost to repair and maintain it? Seems to me the cost is known, and easily calculated by anyone interested in a honest debate of the cost, as opposed to a Carl Sagan-like debate about "billions and billions".

      Well there is 2 billion already on the budget that was originally signed just to repair the fence. Do you really think a wall would cost less to repair? Especially one that's been cut and you have to remove, dispose of and replace sections of? The upkeep could end up costing more than the construction.

      As for cutting, there is this device called a saw; and people have cut through the proposed designs using one. Fox probably failed to mention that though... but if you google it you will see it was on all the main news outlets.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    119. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump made a campaign promise that Mexico would fund the wall.

      THIS!

    120. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all pretty much the same.
      https://xkcd.com/2091/

    121. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like holding the entire country hostage until you get a gold-plated statue of yourself on the Mexican border. Why on Earth would any reasonable person cave into that demand? Not only would it be a waste of money that could be used for something better, it would just open us up for further hostage-taking and ultimately autocratic rule where one person tells everyone what to do, or else. America has no king, America needs no king.

    122. Re:Trump owns it by dknj · · Score: 1

      Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt?

      So, lets go back to where this all began. Bush. I was upset with Bush for taking a surplus to a record level deficit. Then Obama for doubling it. And now Trump for being on track to more than double it.

      STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT THE PAST, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS NOW.
      Stop complaining about the past, we need to address this now. NOT yesterday, we cannot change the path. NOT tomorrow, we'll be in even more debt. TODAY.

      Can you agree to that, bobbied?

    123. Re:Trump owns it by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      So, a wall is cheaper.

      It is cheaper, indeed.

      You know what's even cheaper than the wall and just as effective?

      Doing absolutely nothing.

      ...and saving every man, woman, and child in the United States nearly $18.

    124. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. Which is exactly the GOP reasoning why no restrictions on guns should ever be passed or ever have been passed. Same for abortion rights and the ACA.

      Now, is petulant child styles of democracy and negotiation always good, or only good when the goal suits your values?

    125. Re:Trump owns it by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Please, describe these "household" tools that can cut though steel.

      A hacksaw.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    126. Re:Trump owns it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

      This is patently false and obviously not valid.
      Stopped reading right there. Troll language. Fuck the fuck off, Trump supporting jackass.

    127. Re:Trump owns it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

      Why doesn't your fucktard excuse for a '''president''' actually LISTEN to the experts who are TELLING him, over and over again, that his stupid-ass wall is stupid?

    128. Re:Trump owns it by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      And even if he somehow managed to get the national "emergency" through the courts, there's the little problem of needing to acquire thousands of acres of private land to build the wall on.

      That's also going to get tied up in court for years.

      And good luck being the federal government and swinging through Texas telling ranchers there for generations that you're taking their land. That might be enough to turn Texas blue a lot sooner than it's going to be blue anyway.

      The wall is never going to get built. At least not before Trump is well out of office, and likely not before he's dead and gone. It's just not feasible. You'd have to be an idiot to think otherwise.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    129. Re:Trump owns it by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      Isn't there a simple solution available to all that desire government provided health care? Move to a country that does that. It is a marketplace of countries. The wrong thing to do is to turn all countries into the same thing, USA should be a beacon of liberty and freedom FROM government, that is why people *used to* immigrate to the States.Now they immigrate for a welfare cheque, which is the backwards, wrong reason to allow immigration. USA should have individualism, anti collectivism. Collectivism should be practiced elsewhere by willing participants, people shouldnt ne forced into it, that is authoritarianism and slavery.

    130. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fiscal conservative" Republican logic is great. Bitch endlessly about spending in a recession. Rack up massive deficits in a strong economy. Then claim, "hey, what's 6 billion compared to that?" Well, more than 50 F-35s to put it in perspective.

    131. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like every Democratic president tends to do, Obama reduced the deficits. The numbers are public record. How can you possibly claim otherwise with a straight face, and expect to be taken seriously?

    132. Re:Trump owns it by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      The reason smugglers funnel through legal ports of entry is because existing walls make cross desert travel much more dangerous, encouraging them to attempt to get past the border control agents.

      And back here in reality, it's because you just can't get enough humans willing to transport hundreds of tons of product over tens to hundreds of miles on foot, and because they'd be trivial to spot in the quantities you'd need.

      You seem to not understand the scale of the amount of drugs that come across the border. It requires trucks to move that many tons of drugs. Some guys with backpacks tromping through the desert really aren't sufficient.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    133. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have they figured out their debt problem too? No? Yes, I know, as long as their is still some blanace left on your credit card, you have money, right?

    134. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you keep repeating lies that have been debunked over and over? The latest CBO report shows that ACA reduced the deficit by $143 billion over the last ten years. It's doing what it's designed to do - makes healthcare affordable so people can go to a doctor before their health issues become an expensive emergency that we all have to pay for anyway. Here's some reading for you if you are really just ignorant and not willfully deceitful: https://www.thebalance.com/cbo-report-obamacare-3305627

    135. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you get this shit?

      Lowest unemployment in 50 years, people actually reentering the workforce, wages actually increasing and tax recipits at record levels. What planet do you live on? Orange Man Bad?

      (In fairness, the latter alweays happens unless there is a severe downturn, but it's idiotic to suggest we have less money now because of the cuts.)

    136. Re:Trump owns it by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It's true, Trump's great wall can be defeated in minutes by a $1 hacksaw.

      https://youtu.be/b2gedQN26YI

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    137. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Berlin Wall

      Well, when you have a whole population that wants to escape a real shit-hole it will cost quite a bit.. Especially since they had guard-towers with sharp-shooters all along that wall.

      If Mexico was that bad then it would probably cost a shitload since you would have 10'ths of thousands of people that would try to cross every single day.. Current reports says around 1000 people apprehended per day..

      A physical barrier would work as a deterrent and it would reduce the amount of illegal immigrants crossing the border. If the best option is to build a wall along the full length or if it's better to have a combination of high-tech/border-wall/natural barriers i have no idea about.. And neither do you i suspect..

      This can be a quite interesting read and gives quite a few different views on the issue:
      https://nordic.businessinsider.com/us-mexico-border-wall-photos-maps-2018-5?r=US&IR=T

      Give shit when shit belongs, but just because something comes from Trump does not automatically make it bad.. I don't agree with many things Trump does, but i do recognize that he still does quite a bit of things that are good for the US.... And he does need someone to install a firewall between his brain and mouth because that amount of spam that leaks out is an issue for him. =)

      Illegal immigrants should go thru the same steps as anyone that tries to legally immigrate..... If you want to fight so people from other countries can migrate to the US do it by promoting regulation that makes it easier instead of fighting anything that makes it harder for an illegal immigrant to get in.

    138. Re:Trump owns it by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      This is now officially the Democrat's Shutdown.

      Oh, really? I wasn't aware that Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh had switched parties.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    139. Re: Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      So you want to make "Perfection the enemy of the good" ? I sure hope not.

      Look, getting drugs INTO a prison takes more effort BECAUSE of the walls, or are you going to deny that? Being more difficult makes the supply lower inside a prison. And when we think about it, how do these drugs get inside the walls? The obviously answer is: Through the doors, and because of this we have a much smaller aperture to search and those who go though them. Walls/fences/physical barriers make the job of catching drugs going into prisons easier by funneling smuggling though the openings in the barrier.

      So... unless you are ready to argue that you are only willing to accept PERFECT solutions and admit that means you don't really have any solutions to offer, can we dispense with this pretense and say what this objection of yours really is. It's not that walls don't help, they do. Are you rejecting the good because it's not perfect yet you have no solutions of your own?

      What this really is has nothing to do with finding the best solution, but disrupting a working idea because of the implications of agreeing to it. This is more about who's making the suggestion than the suggestion itself. Of course a wall/fence/barrier would help, you know it, I know it, the voters at large know it, but one side of the isle cannot bring themselves to actually SAY what's obviously true... For political reasons, and not much else.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    140. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are things always right or can they be used wrongly?

    141. Re:Trump owns it by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      If your goal is to be a criminal, and sell black market goods, your margins are rather slim, to risk your life wondering the desert or crossing tough mountains, or just having to traverse many miles to sell such goods. Just isn't worth it. You are better off risking a random check at the borders.

      Or going to work for a guy who owns a midget sub.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    142. Re:Trump owns it by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      $4.4T, you mean? No, our Federal budget is NOT $44T....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    143. Re:Trump owns it by BenBoy · · Score: 1

      I say we write the $57 dollar check

      And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
      But we've proved it again and again,
      That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
      You never get rid of the Dane.
      -- RK

    144. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      This was the Jim Acosta argument of "there is no crisis here at the border" (cut to shot though the fence). Well Jim, because there is a fence there...

      You can say there is no crisis if you like, but that doesn't wash with what folks in South Texas (and other border states) will tell you. There hundreds of lives lost each year for illegals trying to cross the border and not making it. Illegal workers, Human trafficking, illicit drugs, arms and likely terrorists use this route to enter the USA all the time but there is no problem you say. Do you not know that the bulk of heroin on the streets comes over this border, illegal arms flow both ways, and those engage in human trafficking both for the illicit sex and importing of labor for what amounts to slavery. Then there is the importation of long ago eradicated dieses marching across our southern border unchecked. These things may not concern you I suppose.

      Yea, there is no crisis... Have we forgotten the border riots of just a few weeks ago, just after the election? Seems so... What's it going to take? A lot I guess.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    145. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      This is patently false and obviously not valid. Stopped reading right there. Troll language. Fuck the fuck off, Trump supporting jackass.

      The truth scares you Rick? Had to stop reading and then cuss me out lest a reasoned argument make a dent in your world view?

      I'm of the opinion that those who resort to name calling know they've already lost the argument. Just like you did Rick. If this is the best the democrats can manage, they are going to loose badly in 2020....

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    146. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the trumptard on the goddamned government-created INTERNET.

    147. Re:Trump owns it by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Give the guy his $100 Billion and be done with him...

      And when he wants another $100B? He now knows how to get it.....

      Remember back when Republicans thought spending money responsibly was a good thing?

    148. Re:Trump owns it by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Trump can declare a national emergency at the border and direct the Pentagon to redirect funds to wall construction - and with that Trump gets to build the wall, as promised.

      No, he'd get taken to court, lose pretty easily (the statistics show there is not an emergency, and the relevant legislation requires that there be no possible way to fund the appropriation. There is a way to fund the appropriation, via negotiating with Congress.)

      Now, it still is an "out" because Trump can use the emergency declaration as an excuse to sign the previously-passed continuing resolution, and then blame the Courts when they tell him no. And this would have been a feasible route a couple weeks ago.

      But now that this has dragged on, there's a bigger problem. Trump did this now because of the ranting of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. Ann will not be pleased if he tries to use the above gambit because it is so transparently going to fail, and he held out for 30 days so he should hold out for 30 more. Surely the Democrats will crack by then!!!

      So either Trump has to find his big-boy pants and start behaving like an adult, or this is going to go on for a while.

    149. Re:Trump owns it by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      At this point, it isn't about money.

      It's about control.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    150. Re:Trump owns it by Linux+Torvalds · · Score: 1

      It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe when you make $44,000 / year and refusing to pay any of the utility bills, buy gas for the car or give the kids milk money for school until the demand for the fence is dropped.

      And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
          But we've proved it again and again,
      That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
          You never get rid of the Dane.

    151. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off with your moronic Whataboutism.

      Or better yet go jam your MAGA hat up your ass while it's field with razorblades

    152. Re:Trump owns it by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      and about a dozen states were lining up to challenge DACA with the same argument, and there was every indication it too would be found unconstitutional.

      Actually, the Trump administration was sued over their attempts to end DACA, and lost. Basically, they're so incompetent they can't follow the necessary regulatory legislation to end it. The Trump administration's justification was "It's illegal". Courts decide what's illegal (as in interpreting the legislation passed by Congress), and already decided it wasn't illegal during the Obama administration.

      So, Trump and company need to come up with a regulatory reason for end it. Not all that hard to make up some justification, but since their real reason is unconstitutional (EEEEWW!!! BROWN PEOPLE!!!!), they haven't managed to come up with a fig leaf and instead tried to go to the SCOTUS with "It's illegal". And were turned away.

      You may recall the President offered protection to 1.7 million DACA enrollees and future enrollees, but Democrats refused to accept that offer.

      If you're talking about his offer this weekend, it's not much of an offer to not do what the courts have already ordered you to not do.

      If you're talking about Pelosi and Shumer's offer in 2017 to fund the entire $27B price tag for the wall in return for permanent residency for the DACA kids, well, Trump didn't take that. And then an election happened, which changed the power dynamics in Congress and that offer is no longer available.

      You'd think a "master negotiator" would have recognized a good deal when it was in his lap.....

      Democrats have been demanding "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" for the past twenty years, using that as an excuse to refuse any incremental improvement to our current immigration policy, yet they never put forth their "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" bill, under either Republican/Democrat administrations.

      Actually, Democrats have put forth many bills over those decades. Republicans in the Senate filibustered them. That's why Obama resorted to DACA.

      Considering you got every fact wrong in your post, it's almost like you're being massively misinformed by your media choices. Might wanna consider doing something about that.

    153. Re:Trump owns it by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It amazes me the lengths that Trump apologists will go to vindicate their lord and saviour.

      Trump has been full of shit on this wall since before he was even elected. First he said Mexico would pay for it. Then he said he would use tariffs to pressure Mexico to pay for the wall (showing that he doesn't understand how tariffs work...). Trump can't even properly justify why he needs almost $6bil to build this wall!

      He had two years with house republicans to get that wall. But now that the Democrats have the house, NOW it's suddenly THEIR fault? Did the Democrats shut down the government? No, Trump did. Period. End of Story. The Democrats are not holding 800k lives in the balance. Trump is. Period. End of Story. Trump is basically acting like a terrorist, and the democrats are doing exactly what they should be doing and refusing to negotiate under duress.

      But no, lets blame the Democrats because... because... if you don't blame the democrats then it's Trumps fault and you don't like that!

      And if Trump does declare a national emergency? Part of me hopes that he won't be that breathtakingly stupid, but another part of me hopes he does, as it will cross the line and prove to the entire country what kind of a megalomaniac he is.

    154. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another reason to keep government small and efficient.

      But the bigger issue is probably that $788 billion deficit... Each year the US pays $364 billion just in interest on its $16.9 trillion debt.... That's about twice the cost of the federal employees..... Or around $1100 per US citizen per year in taxes you don't get something for.

      Don't spend money you don't have...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt
      Have a look at the charts on that page and think about who to vote for the next time.. Get rid of this populist politics and maybe something good can happen again.. Ever since Nixon removed the gold-standard for US currency the deficit has been growing, but that is just correlation and may not prove causation.

    155. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone remember how the GOP argued that DACA was illegal? Whatever happened to that?

    156. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Love your User Name...

      Just so it's clear, the other side sees it in a similar way. We are at stalemate, neither party in this wishes to retreat, but neither can force their specific will without the other. Compromise is required or this situation doesn't change, and 800,000 people go unpaid.

      So the question is how does this play out? That's a political question that's generally a mystery to most, who are not used to thinking about these things in such terms. But here's how I see it.

      Trump's moves late last week, where he suggested that the democrats accept concessions on DACA in exchange for the 5.7 Billion where rejected, even before he made the suggestion. Today he's out there floating another even more radical departure, a general amnesty program, again being rejected flatly. If this continues, it's going to be really hard for democrats in the house to stick to their guns. There are not *that* many democrat seats to turn and with stuff like this Trump is obviously angling to do just that. Democrats will find it harder and harder to keep up this.

      Then the question is what's hurting Trump in this? At this point, not much. His popularity ratings have fallen a few points on Real Clear Politics until the end of last week, where they took a jump up. He's not suffering much from all this, and may possibly be gaining as he maneuvers around the Democrats and their refusal to even talk. I see no reason he cannot keep this going... Waiting for events to turn the tide, or for enough Democrats in the house who are on the bubble to sue for peace and side with Republicans. He has a better than 50/50 chance of prevailing on this.

      So, if we don't compromise here, we go into 2020 election season and Trump has an obvious campaigning issue "Oh look at the "Say NO!" obstructionist Democrats" "They just don't like me and caused all this pain!". Problem is this will resonate with many Trump voters, plus many of the middle who are fed up with all the partisan bickering.

      I suggest that this will play out to Trump's advantage, politically. But I also admit that I don't see many options for the Democrats. They are literally damned if they do and damned if they don't. Given this I suspect that this will take awhile, with the erosion of the Democrats support for defying the president finally making it necessary for them to compromise and end it. But I fear we are weeks away from that.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    157. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      something that the majority of Americans support

      In your deranged fantasies, maybe, Comrade. According to polls of actual Americans, the majority of them oppose the wall. See here and here.

      That's probably because it's an obviously moronic waste of money. Which it would still be even if people supported it. Which, once again, they do not.

    158. Re:Trump owns it by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.

      Surely the cost of preparing a budget wasn't $5.7 Billion...until Trump screwed it up. But he owns it, so it's his problem anyway.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    159. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Your constitution says you have the right to have an idiot for president.

    160. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump plays win win here, as he wants to shut down gov for good.

    161. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Trump Traitor, you lack a basic understanding of how the US government functions. It's not about the $58.

      It's about now allowing a President to close the government unless he gets specific funding on a controversial (not publicly supported) budgetary item (the wall).

      The United States of America has never worked like that.

      So it's now Trump is a traitor because he's threatening to use his constitutionally granted power of a veto but democrats in the house are not, even though they are only sitting on their hands refusing to send a bill to the president unless he agrees to sign what they want?

      You better get a new argument, this one fails the logical consistency test.

      Both sides have the power to do what they are doing, granted by the constitution non-the-less. Neither side has the constitutional high ground, and neither side are engaged in traitorous behavior. Get over your visceral dislike of Trump and stop being a moron about this.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    162. Re: Trump owns it by muffen · · Score: 1

      Nobody turns off websites during a shutdown, you fucking liar.

      https://www.nist.gov/

    163. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Trump!! Trump 2020!!! You must be Mexican I take it? Or white and hate the constitution?

    164. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that his kind want to end the State, it's a free win win. Gullible americlans lose.

    165. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who would you blame for your continued situation?

      As a Federal employee, you will be told whom to blame and your career will be ruined if you don't go along, with the public sector labor unions playing along too, as neither unions nor the politicians really care about the "little people".

      What you're seeing is a great nation sliding into it's age of decadence that precedes a collapse. Empires and great nations last on average about 250 years. If Americans don't stand up to make some big changes the US will collapse within a few decades.

    166. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No worries, we won't ask you to return them.

    167. Re:Trump owns it by yodleboy · · Score: 1

      You really need to take a step away from the keyboard and do something relaxing. Clearly, any topic that involves Trump is beyond your capacity to engage in calmly. Go have these rants on Facebook.

    168. Re:Trump owns it by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe...

      From being raped by the neighbor, who is a decent, hard working family man and has no idea why you think he wants to rape your kids.

    169. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      At this point, it isn't about money.

      It's about control.

      Now that's very true... This is about votes and political power, not about the money.

      If you truly see it that way, it gets pretty obvious who's going to win this bit of political posturing theater and the *only* way this doesn't play into Trump's favor is if Mueller actually comes up with a real live crime that can get him impeached before it's over. Otherwise, Trump just holds on until he can peel off enough democrats in the house from those "on the bubble" and get his way and we have two years for that to play out with ever ratcheting up pressure as expiring budgets, expiring CR's and exceeding Debt Limits hit the democratic log jam. Eventually *somebody* is going to blink and cut a deal.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    170. Re:Trump owns it by yodleboy · · Score: 2

      If you're referring to illegal immigration, focus on the word ILLEGAL. We have laws, if you don't agree with them, you work to get them changed, not tell people to ignore them. Waving it away is disrespectful of the millions of people that have come to this country through the legal immigration process. The United States remains one of the most welcoming countries for people wishing to make a better life. All we ask is for people to follow our laws. Why is that too much to ask? If I rob a bank, then spend the next 20 years being a hard working citizen, that doesn't change the fact that I robbed a bank.

    171. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      LOL.. You mean when the ACA spent a trillion over 10 years without so much as a single republican vote? Not that the cost was the ONLY reason we objected to it..

      So, if you are afraid of getting rolled again, just give him the $105.7 Billion and ask for a DACA fix in return. Or ask him for a complete DACA fix for the $5.7 billion and when he tries to bilk you for more, ask for MORE in return, say amnesty for illegals who can prove they've been here for 10 years or something. If you just set the precedent that you will give him what he wants in return for stuff you want, how's that bad for your cause? When he comes and asks for the $100 Billion you have the same power to say no, not unless you give us something... How's that bad?

      Oh that's right, this isn't about any of that or the DACA kids, illegals, the debt or even border security, it's about stopping Trump and anything he suggests, regardless of who it hurts. Why else are your leaders not even talking to him when he's trying to make deals?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    172. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not have them build something useful, like roads or railroads or hospitals or schools? Or pick up trash in national parks. Or plant trees, or remove graffiti, or just about anything that helps the USA more than a giant wall in the desert.

    173. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      So you *admit* that spending $5.7 billion has no value even if it means getting 800,000 federal workers back to getting paychecks?

      Damn man, that's a really harsh thing to say to a pretty large bunch of largely democrat voters.

      So Trump wants to spend $5.7 Billion on something you consider a boondoggle and for that you are going to flatly refuse to discuss anything while Rome burns around you? Ok.. Have it your way, the shutdown will just grind on then because there is nothing to gain by agreeing with your side's position and as you complain about a measly 5.7 Billion, your house is falling down around you..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    174. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the argument. The Argument is that it's too much money to just flush down the toilet on an ineffective vanity project.

      Ah yes.. So it's ineffective? Why do we have walls already then? Seems El Paso Texas needs their border wall to stay safe.. Walls are OBVIOUSLY effective. Stop repeating that bald faced lie. Walls work, the modern world is awash in walls that work.

      The rest of your argument amounts to "I don't like any idea Trump comes up with." It's not a vanity project to him or his supporters. It may be an attempt to fulfill a campaign promise, but that doesn't make it a vanity project like a statute or building named after him would be. Besides, I don't think Trump cares about vanity projects with taxpayer money. He has plenty of his own money to fund vanity projects anywhere he wants to. He doesn't need your tax money for it.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    175. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Nope, just ask for what you want and stick to your guns.

      You do realize that you have basically argued for total gridlock for the next two years and condemned 800,000 people to be out of work until January 2021 at the earliest right? I wonder how that will play with the democrat base, considering that we will hit the end of the other CR's, won't have a budget and will exceed our debt ceiling between now and then. You want a real shutdown and not this quasi non-essential services thing? Because your logic is heading us there.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    176. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that's the same effect that causes you to misspell a word when replying to complain about a misspelled word.

    177. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't understand how this "budget" thing works since Clinton took all the entitlements "off budget"

      There is the "budget" deficit which is $800 Billion, this is how much more money we budget than we take in from taxes... But there is a different amount that we borrow, that includes the entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare which ALSO run a deficit, taking in less than they spend, to the tune of about $300 Billion, for a TOTAL increase in the debt of $1.1 Trillion.

      Often folks are not careful about which numbers they are talking about and conflate the increase in the debt and the budget deficit as being the same thing. They are not.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    178. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't disagree with you but in FY 2018 the federal budget was 5+ trillion.

    179. Re: Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's supposed to be, but Trump seems to be showing dementia and has presented the invoice to the wrong people.

    180. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      That would be a great out for the Democrats. It wouldn't be their fault, they would not have caved, and Trump gets to deal with the bazillion lawsuits and other scandal associated with his vanity emergency.

    181. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Oops, not billion...$4.407 trillion. It's easy to make mistakes with such large numbers.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    182. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because most of the people crossing are uneducated socialist peasants who can not contribute to the country they want to leech off of.

      How is that not obvious?

      Hey I know, these are such wonderful people, how about you move a few families into your home to help cover your bills? They are obviously great people and better than your neighbors.

    183. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      So Trump's new wall is expensive and unnecessary. Any purpose it might serve is already handled by the existing infrastructure.

    184. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt?

      Yes, but he did have the excuse of trying to get us out of the worst recession in US history. Recessions are when you're supposed to go into deficit spending.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    185. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't understand how this "budget" thing works since Clinton took all the entitlements "off budget"

      Entitlements were never ON budget. Social Security and Medicare are entirely separate programs paid for through payroll deductions.

      Did you know what Social Security is still taking in more than it's paying out? That there is still a surplus?

      Entitlements don't impact the budget.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    186. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      What do you propose? Because most of the crazy things I'm hearing from the democrats are *very* expensive things.

      Universal health care? Free College? Student Loan forgiveness? Minimum living wage?

      BTW, Trump isn't on track to double the debt like Obama did. He may be adding to the debt at the same rate, but that just means it's impossible for him to double the $20 Trillion of debt. Best he could ad is only $8 Trillion at this rate if he goes two full terms, for his first term he's on track for $4 Trillion. Also, with GDP growing at an unprecedented 3-4% makes this amount of debt more manageable and less of a concern as we can grow out of some of this. But, remember, spending bills come from the House, where they squabbled about how spending more money was a budget cut because it was below the baseline budget.

      So, let's get serious.. How about we do this to start? Let's reduce baseline budgets increases to no more than the GDP growth less 2% (or zero, which ever is bigger) for as long as the National Debt is above 70% of GDP starting in the next budget, government wide. Once the National Debt drops below 70% of GDP, we up the baseline budget to be 1% less than GDP growth.

      How's that sound to you?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    187. Re: Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      Trump does, after all, have a history of stiffing people who do work for him.

    188. Re:Trump owns it by sarren1901 · · Score: 1

      The Democrats are posture as far left as they can to ramp up for the primaries. It's a brutal thing. They are self bashing pretty nicely too. Who ever comes through as the primary winner will definitely take some punishment on the way. I've seen negative articles on most Dem candidates from CNN and New York Times, not Fox where you would expect it.

      Harris was apparently tough on crime. Beto is white and male. Biden is old, white and male. The Hawaii lady was/is homophobic.

      Needless to say it should be an interesting primary but in the meantime the Dems really don't want to agree to a wall. That would be like taking poison for their base, which on the extreme side of things wants to disband ICE and try open borders. Most Dems aren't so far left but you got to walk a line to win the primary.

    189. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where [SIC] you upset with the ACA passing because of it's obvious costs? What about the QE1, QE2, QE3, and QEForever spending? Any of that bother you?

      CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenues ...

      CBO estimate of the budgetary effects of the PPACA

    190. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The senate majority leader can end the shutdown any time he wants to.

    191. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      Your own argument suggests that Trump's wall is unnecessary, we've already got one.

      So you're suggesting I should spend $500 on a spoiled ham sandwich out of a vending machine when I'm not even hungry.

      Buit MOOOOOOOM! I NEEEEEED a Supreme brick! It's ONLY $1000! It's a MATTER of LIFE and DEATH!

    192. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Um.. You are partially right. Yes, entitlements don't effect the budget... But they do drive up the debt if they run in deficits.

      Social Security is NOT collecting more than it spends anymore. That ended during Obama's years. Now, Social Security does have a "trust fund" to draw on, but the reality is that this fund is a pile of US Treasury bonds, so as they cash out these bonds, the cash has to come from someplace so it's either printed to retire the bond, or the Treasury has to sell the bonds to somebody. Social Security will go "bankrupt" or really just run though the Trust Fund in something like 10 years, at which time it will have to borrow.

      Entitlements are "off budget" but really that's just a slight of hand for the politicians to avoid having to deal with the financial realities of entitlements, at last in my view. They DO add to the debt and both Social Security and Medicare are part of the difference between the budget deficit and the increase in the debt. All the supplemental funding bills, which are off budget too, are the rest.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    193. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      We need more of them, or is that reality lost on you. No it's just logic I guess that's lost on you.. :)

      I give you examples of how well they work because somebody says walls are ineffective and a waste.. Then you turn and say, so we already have what we need... So you *admit* they work as advertised, but you don't want any more. Really?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    194. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Seems that he failed in doing that.. Getting us out of the recession...

      He had 8 years... Then, with two years of his leaving office, some guy nobody ever expected comes in and "fixes" it in less than 2 years with a tax cut and regulation roll backs...

      Yea, and now you don't want to spend 5.7 Billion as if it's going to kill us after 22 Trillion didn't..

      I call this partisan politics on your part.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    195. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Canada,

      Please do everything you can to encourage northward flight over your southern border.

      Thanks,
      - Proud Americans

    196. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TDS is strong with this one!

      Anyone paying any attention and who cares about the truth knows the dossier was faked Hillary crap she paid for. In fact, she paid ....drum roll... RUSSIANS for it!!! There is your collusion and election interference.

      But please do not let facts get in the way of your blind hate and fake news from MSNBC and CNN.

      Oh hey how about that thing his lawyer DIDNT say that was the last impeachment thing a few days ago? Or the 50 things before it.

      Yall are just butt hurt your hateful incompetent criminal candidate lost and it kills you.

      None of this has anything to do with RUSSSIA!!!! or any real crimes.

      Butt hurt. You.

    197. Re:Trump owns it by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      I've personally overstayed my visa before just out of laziness. It's not the same thing as robbing a bank. I'm sure you've never done anything wrong but the rest of have.

    198. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Yet it did cost 1 trillion over 10 years by the OMB estimate... Actually it was more because they had raided Medicare to keep the bill under the Trillion magic number, then bumped it up after the fact in a "restore Medicare" bill that added back in a few hundred Billion.

      I remember this very clearly. I recall thinking there was no way this was going to drive my healthcare costs down and the price tag was huge for what we where getting. Then the bill came from OMB under the magic Trillion over 10 years, even though the estimates clearly showed INCREASING government costs from year 5 on, having stolen from Medicare and collected taxes for 3 years while providing no benefits at all, to anybody. Oh I remember this budget busting mess and the "if you like your doctor" and "family of 4 savings of $2,500/year" lies that came with it quite clearly.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    199. Re: Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Kind of hard to argue that the tax cuts busted the deficits when income tax receipts are up and deficits are not up by anywhere near what the tax cuts "cost".

      Seems to me we are seeing GDP growth above 3% now, which will drive tax receipts up more year over year as a result. Why did GDP growth near 4% last quarter? Blame those tax cuts if you dare.

      The situation is getting BETTER not continuing to get worse like under the last administration, where we NEVER saw sustained GDP growth over 2% for more than a quarter and the guy in the oval office was telling us that GDP growth over 3% just wasn't possible with the world economy and never would be again. He actually said we should be happy with sub 2% GDP growth, it was all we where ever going to get. Boy was he wrong.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    200. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Tell you what, we will send them an invoice for the $5.7 Billion once it's built.

      Nobody ever thought Mexico would cut a check and send it to us. Everybody who was actually paying attention realized that this was to be an indirect "Mexico would pay" for the wall. And Trump has argued that the new trade deal that replaced NAFTA did just that, by leveling the playing field a bit with Mexico and trade.

      But we will just send the bill if it makes you feel better and you can collect it if you like. In the mean time, cut the check so we can start building.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    201. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Yea, because border security has absolutely no impact on anybody's life, liberty or happiness in this country.

      Yea, no need to control our borders. Illicit drugs don't kill all that many of us and we don't care about human trafficking though our country and we really don't care if you come here legally or not take the jobs of our poor and use up government services like public schools and healthcare, it doesn't matter at all.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    202. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eat a bag of dicks faggot

    203. Re:Trump owns it by sjames · · Score: 1

      I said TRUMP's wall is an ineffective waste. Note that the Democrats already offered money to augment what we already have, but it wasn't Trump's worthless steel slats, so he rejected the offer.

    204. Re:Trump owns it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      "Truth"

      https://reason.com/archives/20...
      https://www.insidesources.com/...
      ..and so on: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=why+...
      I'm FAR from the only one who thinks this.

      Meanwhile here's just ONE proposed technological solution proposed by a Republican congressman: https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/27...
      ..but you don't want to hear that do you? You just want to "stick it to the liberals" regardless of logic or reason.
      You're Just Another Trump-Supporting Jackass Troll. Fuck off.

    205. Re:Trump owns it by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

      Trump Traitor is referring to you. You are the Traitor. You really are not very bright.

      Everyone who stands with Trump and his subversion of democracy and his obstruction of justice is traitor.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/opinion/sunday/trump-impeachment.html

    206. Re:Trump owns it by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      All of the things you mention are important.

      Not a single one of them would be addressed by a wall.

    207. Re: Trump owns it by dryeo · · Score: 1

      The problem is money. Refugees need to be housed, clothed, fed, given medical care etc while waiting for their refugee claim to be handled, and there's a large backlog of claims due to shortage of money. Then if their claim is accepted, they then need to be supported for about another year until they become productive members of society.
      There's only so much money, so the number of refugees that can be handled at once is limited.

      Then there is politics. A Federal election coming up later this year and a right wing opposition that is using illegal immigrants (refugees) as a political point along with the deficit and the fact that after the American tax cut, we need to cut more taxes.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    208. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True.

      Obviously the answer is to bring in more illegals from shitty broken countries to show us how a country should be run.

    209. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Seems that he failed in doing that.. Getting us out of the recession...

      Recession has a very specific meaning. By definition, yes, the recession ended at the end of 2009/beginning of 2010. The structural problems that have been in place since Reaganomics are still in effect, so it's not what you would really call "fixed", but it's not in recession, and jobs were adding and there was economic growth.

      Yea, and now you don't want to spend 5.7 Billion as if it's going to kill us after 22 Trillion didn't..

      No, the reason I don't want to see 5.7 billion spent is because there's absolutely no plan for what kind of wall Donald wants to build, or where, or when, and he still hasn't spend the money he was given last year for the wall.

      It's a boondoggle. A flim-flam. And you don't give someone money who's up to his eyeballs in corruption and crime. If it wasn't an emergency during the two years that Republicans controlled all of congress, then it's not an emergency now. Trump could have had his 5.7 billion at any time, but he didn't seem to think it was important.

      So yes, this is partisan on my part. I'm partisan to not giving criminal organizations money to build themselves monuments to racism.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    210. Re: Trump owns it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Hey I know, these are such wonderful people, how about you move a few families into your home to help cover your bills? They are obviously great people and better than your neighbors.

      I live literally surrounded by such families...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    211. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Social Security is NOT collecting more than it spends anymore.

      Yes, it is. Any money paid from the Treasury to Social Security has been interest on money that the Treasury borrowed from Social Security to begin with.

      So indeed, not only does Social Security NOT make the deficit bigger, it has actually kept the deficit from being even bigger than it is.

      It's like blaming your kids for wasting money on tuition when you've actually blown their tuition money on hookers and blow. Despite what you've read on right-wing and libertarian websites that are opposed to the very idea of Social Security, it does not add to the deficit.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    212. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly! And the earth is flat! And fly to the moon?! Lol how stupid is that? Everyone knows if you go to the moon you just get eaten by the Giant Cheese Eating Space Mouse!

      Back here in Reality Land: just because YOU think something is true does not necessarily age it so. Do they no,longer teach the difference between fact and opinion in grade school anymore?

    213. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not an emergency? Hundreds of thousands of people illegally crossing the border every year is a-ok hunky dory normal?

      It has become so under both America hating democrats and faux conservative trash like bush but any adult who loves this country can easily see a problem.

      Since you are the one to mention numbers, exactly what number of uneducated useless third worlders from socialist shit holes invading our country would be an emergency for you?

      And exactly why is it ok if even a single person illegally crosses the border?

      Stupid children in your college echo chambers. Once you start paying taxes you will understand.

    214. Re:Trump owns it by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I am okay with the costs of the ACA. Because moving to a public healthcare system would be cheaper than the current corporate system.

      ACA has nothing to do with public healthcare system. Public healthcare system is paid from taxes. ACA is just advance payment for treatment that does not happen.

      Paying $1500 a month is not an option even for upper middle class. That's $18,000 a year. Vast majority of this payment is "insurance" against $100,000 surgeries and $3000 a night hospital beds.

      ACA is what made US a laughingstock of Europe. Russia has more affordable healthcare than US.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    215. Re: Trump owns it by subie · · Score: 0

      Did you honestly think the Republicans would bring those bills to the floor for a vote?

    216. Re: Trump owns it by subie · · Score: 0

      The thing is that in 2008, Pelosi stated that she was for a wall. As did Schumer in 2009 and of course Hillary said it while on the campaign trail in 2014. These are facts that can be verified so why suddenly are Democrat leaders against what they claimed they were for? Btw, I'm a Democrat.

    217. Re: Trump owns it by subie · · Score: 0

      The DACA program was done by executive order from Obama. It was never passed as true legislation. What Trump did was correct because the whole situation should have been openly discussed in both houses and then create bill which i believe Trump said he would sign.

    218. Re:Trump owns it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Trump offered to give Democrats everything they wanted

      So if I come to your house, steal you TV and disconnect your internet, and then I offer you your TV and internet back in exchange for something, I'm a good guy? What has Trump offered the democrats that he hasn't taken from them in the first place?

      Incidentally he hasn't offered them the one thing they do want: Not to pay a cent for his idiotic wall.

    219. Re:Trump owns it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      He only promised to kick the DACA can down the road for 3 years

      Help me here. I am under the impression DACA was a pre-existing program that Trump is taking away. Even if it IS reinstated without deadline how can this be justified as a something positive?

      If I kidnap your daughter and demand $5bn and offer to return her to you, I'm a good guy and giving you what you want right?

    220. Re:Trump owns it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You mean the rest of the world that uses the US as their healthcare R&D?

      LOL, sorry but R&D on health care is being spent everywhere in the world. But I get it #MAGA.

      You mean the rest of the world where you wait days/weeks/months (determined by your governments healthcare bureaucrats)?

      I'm sure he means the rest of the world where waiting is determined by triage by medical professionals and if you disagree with it you're free to pay to get a procedure done at the private hospital.

      Why is everything so black and white, one or the other with you Americans. You do realise you can have the best of all worlds if you pulled your heads out of your red or blue arses.

      You mean the rest of the world where, when the government budget limits are reached, you no longer are able to get healthcare?

      I think you live in a different world to the rest of us.

    221. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facts hurt. When you fall back to declaring whataboutism you are not being clever. You are demonstrating you have no reply and are a hypocrite.

      As far as pain goes that was my cock in your ass, not my MAGA hat.

      Carry on!

    222. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Not to the deficit because they are "off budget", but it will add to the national debt when it runs out of it's trust fund.

      So all is not golden with Social Security and Medicare, they WILL be serious drivers of the national debt about 10 years before I retire.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    223. Re: Trump owns it by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Haven't seen any temper tantrums for gun control, just sad resigned protests. Also abortion rights and ACA are all temper tantrums on the far right. Conservatives don't take losing well.

      Fun Fact: Congress could have never voted to end slavery if the south hadn't had a temper tantrum and seceded.

    224. Re:Trump owns it by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I am okay with the costs of the ACA. Because moving to a public healthcare system would be cheaper than the current corporate system.

      The rest of the world has proven that to be true. Only in the backwards USA do Republican morons dispute what the rest of the world has figured out.

      An American Ex-Pat in Colombia once asked me... "Is health care in Europe really as bad as Fox News makes it out to be". I said "No, sure it isn't perfect but I always get the treatment I need". He replied with "I always figured if it were that bad, Europeans would be coming to the US for treatment".

      And he had a good point, Europeans aren't going to the US for essential treatment, much like Americans going to Thailand for cheap dental and cosmetic surgery, the only Europeans going to the US for "treatment" are those after a boob job cheaper than they can get in Europe.

      Its also cheaper, I pay into the most expensive healthcare system in Europe, the UK's NHS (National Health Service) which takes US$5000 of taxpayer money per person. The US takes US$9000 of taxpayer funding per person and to add insult to injury, I or my Employer do not need to pay anything on top of that.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    225. Re:Trump owns it by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse having a wall with controlling borders. The former has vanishingly little to do with the latter.

    226. Re: Trump owns it by QuantumPion · · Score: 1

      From 2017-2019, republicans had the majority in the house and senate. However, in the senate, you need 60 votes to end a filibuster which the republicans did not have, and democrats vowed to filibuster any budget which included wall funding. So they could not pass a new budget, only the same continuing resolution (which only requires 50 votes to pass) that has been rolling forward since Obama. Trump grudgingly agreed to that continuing resolution in early 2018 to avoid a shutdown which the republicans claimed would hurt their midterm election results. But Trump vowed it would be the last time.

    227. Re:Trump owns it by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Nationalised healthcare is cheaper than the US's current system. The US currently spends more per capita on healthcare than any country with nationalised healthcare, without all the benefits. If a person can go to college and get a job which will pay more taxes over their working life than if they did go to college, and if that increase in taxes is more than the cost of tuition, it will pay for itself.

      It's not expensive. It's just cutting out lots of companies represented by powerful lobbyists, hence the reluctance of government to do anything about it.

    228. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1, Insightful

      All of the things you mention are important.

      Not a single one of them would be addressed by a wall.

      OH really?

      Again, that's obviously a false statement. How can I assert this? Because we ALREADY have walls for the very purposes I outline above. Take a look at El Paso and the crime ridden city of Juarez on the Mexico side of the river. We have a wall there because they work. Also, in case you haven't heard, the 5.7 Billion is for additional mileage and upgrades to the existing wall, not a completely walled border. This is about adding security by extending the walls we have further so they are harder to walk around.

      But your argument makes the perfect the enemy of the good. You argue that because it's not perfect, it's not good enough to do. Well, nothing is perfect. The question is will the extended walls help? That is a resounding YES. Now if you are honest, you are really arguing that it's not worth the expense, but you obviously cannot say that because you will lose the debate on those grounds.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    229. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse having a wall with controlling borders. The former has vanishingly little to do with the latter.

      Only in your addled brain. You are being lied to and are mistaken, walls DO help with the issues we face on the border.

      Trump isn't building a complete wall, he's only trying to add to and upgrade the existing walls. Existing walls which actually DO work quite well.

      Also, if you want to spend money on more technology and more agents, by all means. But let's take the border patrol's advice and build longer and higher walls where they say they would do the most good and make their lives safer and easier. They are not crying for more "electronic watch dogs" they are asking for better barriers (higher and longer walls) first, as the best bang for the buck.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    230. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Not to the deficit because they are "off budget", but it will add to the national debt when it runs out of it's trust fund.

      So, your assertion that entitlements currently "add to the debt" has now changed to "will someday add to the debt".;

      But even that significantly different assertion you are now making is dependent on the notion that no baby boomer will ever die. The entire "entitlements are a time bomb" campaign has been predicated on falsehood.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    231. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Ah the "it's cheaper" canard.

      I know of folks in Canada who are not happy with their nationalized health care. Folks in the UK generally don't like it either. And by personal experience I can tell you that Medicare is not something you'd like.

      I had to manage my Mother's Medicare coverage as she went through cancer treatments and I can tell you that they DO ration care when you are on such government plans. Ration such things as PET scans (necessary to diagnose and track cancer's spread) which my mother was denied because she'd had her lifetime maximum allowed scans (two). Finally, after YEARS of trying we broke down and paid for a scan ourselves, only to discover that she only had months to live. She died from cancer within a month, cancer that might have been treatable had we known sooner. Medicare is great for hospice care at least, they don't mind paying for that at all... Hurry up and die, especially if you are sick with something expensive to treat.

      Personally, I fully understand the TRUTH about single payer healthcare. I had to renew my driver's license in December. It took me 6 hours, 3 of which I spent standing outside in the blowing rain because the building was full, then 3 hours inside waiting to spend 5 min to check my vision, take my thumb prints and get a picture. Like my mother, if you are healthy, government run healthcare is great and cheap, but if you are sick, it's sometimes a death sentence and often involves waiting in LONG lines to get basic care.

      The reason it's "cheaper" is because it's rationed and care is limited and tailored for the average person. If you are unique or your ailment is expensive to treat, you are going to die. It's also more expensive now because WE fund the R&D for the rest of the world. You recommend that we start to ration care and stop spending on R&D? Yea, that's a good solution, it might be cheaper, but are you sure you want that? My DMV experience, and my Mother's loosing fight with Medicare says it won't be good....

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    232. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      A false hood? Tell that to the OMB... I've seen their projections. Are they lying about this?

      Social Security is tracking to insolvency in about a decade, unless you expect to up the death rate and lower life expectancy by putting huge curbs on Medicare expenses which are on track to exceed 10% of GDP... Involuntary assisted suicide for old people might work I guess.

      I suppose the "solution" is to move the retirement age to the right, alot.... but ho boy, you know what would break lose if anybody suggested any such thing.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    233. Re:Trump owns it by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      Pelosi/Democrats have declared the wall "immoral" - how do you back down from that position without being seen as "caving"?

      Easy, you act like a mature adult.

      What is mature and adult like to allowing Trump to win this shutdown? What is mature and adult in declaring a national emergency to fund a wall. Obama was overstepping his bounds when he handed out executive orders, Trump would be so far over those bounds that I don't see how he could have a career when he left, or even be allowed another day in the oval office.

    234. Re:Trump owns it by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      A precedent was set with Obama and his executive orders rather than congressional laws. This made a lot of people nervous. Trump is the extreme reaction. Rather than a "Tit for Tat" it is a nuclear response to a misdemeanor offense. It is an immediate escalation to the endgame. Start destabilizing things with executive orders that last only as long as a presidency, and you eventually end up with government shutdowns.

      Lets go ahead and deal with the abuse of power now. End the shutdown, End Trump's presidency, and establish that governing by executive order is to be reserved for emergencies and such.

    235. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give him the money. Let him build the wall. If it works out, great for everyone. If it doesn't, well Republicans will pay the price at the next elections. It's not as if that money is going to be spent on anything else of value. It will be pissed away on some other feel good project or pork and most of it will never be used for the purpose it was allocated for.

      You are too simpleton. Most average Americans have very short memory about what happened in politic. Even worse, most of them listen to only one side of media. So they WILL BELIEVE in whatever stories coming from the media regardless the fact. As a result, the truth is covered by "alternative" fact. This has been happening over and over again in the past 2 years. Haven't you ever learned already?

    236. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly! All the people who want a racist wall should move to Israel! What a great way to look at it!

      The thing you seem to not realize is that the majority (70%) of American citizens want government healthcare, while only 20% of them want this dumb fucking wall. Maybe you 30% that are rabidly against medicare for all should get the fuck out, since you obviously don't agree with the American ideals on anything.

    237. Re:Trump owns it by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the OMB... I've seen their projections. Are they lying about this?

      Yes, they are lying about it. The OMB is led by Nick Mulvaney, a Trump appointee (and now his chief of staff). Are you really surprised to learn that he's a lying sack of shit? Do you believe the OMB was ever some down-the-middle non-partisan umpire who only "called 'em like they sees 'em"? They've always been a political organization.

      Social Security is tracking to insolvency in about a decade, unless you expect to up the death rate

      This is what I mean about the lie. The death rate is already going to go up because baby boomers are dying off - more every day. And guess what? They're not making any more baby boomers. When the largest age cohort enters their golden years, they naturally start to die off. When they're gone, that big lump in the middle of the snake goes away and then Social Security becomes solvent again. All the right-wing jackoff Social Security hand-wringing is based on the notion that there will always be baby boomers.

      I suppose the "solution" is to move the retirement age to the right, alot.

      Not at all. If any solution is necessary, we can just remove the cap on payroll taxes, so someone making $500,000 /year pays the same percentage as someone making $55,000/year. Problem solved permanently with no increase in retirement age.

      We should be looking to make the retirement age younger, and increase benefits, not cut them. It's doable, but first we have to destroy myths like "Social Security Crisis".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    238. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a CR?

    239. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are you getting that bullshit from? No, the vast majority of government workers are not democrats, the numbers are fairly close with a slight democratic leaning. This hurts just as many republicans as democrats, especially since a lot of republicans benefit from services that can't get now even if they don't work for the government (e.g. farmers)

    240. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To improve on your analogy, Medicare for all is supported by close to 90% of Americans (whereas the wall is supported by less than 10%). So why not sell one of the guns out of over 30,000 in our gun safe to cure the entire family of the diseases they are guaranteed to die from in a few years?

    241. Re:Trump owns it by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      LOL.. You mean when the ACA spent a trillion over 10 years without so much as a single republican vote?

      It's really strange that you decided to bring up the ACA to refute the claim that Republicans are not spending money wisely on the wall. Almost like you're desperately using a flamethrower on a strawman.....

      So, if you are afraid of getting rolled again, just give him the $105.7 Billion and ask for a DACA fix in return.

      That was offered by Pelosi and Schumer in 2017. Trump didn't take it. Since Democrats gained a ton of power in the 2018 elections, Trump would now have to make a better deal than that. (Also, it's pretty odd that someone who is supposed to be good at making deals can not make one when a great deal falls into his lap. He already couldn't do anything to the DACA kids because of court orders, and he gets his wall? Sign that you orange idiot)

      It's almost like you aren't paying attention beyond the soundbites you're being fed.

      If you just set the precedent that you will give him what he wants in return for stuff you want, how's that bad for your cause?

      You're mistaking Trump for a rational actor. He already agreed to fund the government without the wall. That's why the Republican House and Republican Senate passed bills to do so in December.

      Then Ann Coulter said bad things about Trump, and Trump suddenly insisted his wall must be funded RIGHT NOW. Nevermind the 2 years of Republican majorities where this emergency didn't even come up for a vote....

      And before you wander off into "60 votes!!!" land, 1) he had an offer on the table for Democratic votes in exchange for permanent residency for DACA kids, and 2) spending bills, such as one that funds the construction of the wall, can be passed via reconciliation and thus only require a simple majority.

      Why else are your leaders not even talking to him when he's trying to make deals?

      He was trying to make a deal when he stormed out of the meeting?

      Or was he trying to make a deal when he offered to follow the court orders forbidding the deportation of DACA kids?

      Or was he trying to negotiate when he sent Pence to talk, and then immediately tore into Pence for talking?

      Making a deal requires more than "gimme wall!!!!!" followed by "Ok, I won't break the law, and in return gimme wall!!!!". He'd have to actually offer a concession.

      However, we know he can not make a deal. Ann Coulter vetoed his offer to follow court orders as "amnesty" and unacceptable. Since Ann's rant was a major factor in Trump starting this crisis, her approval is required. Or Trump has to find his balls, but apparently Ann's got them in a jar somewhere.

      So this is going to go on until McConnell can't keep his caucus together anymore.

    242. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5.7 billion is NOT a one time deal. It's a down payment. Every conservative and Trump supporter i know is aware of this. They're also aware that the actual projected cost of the wall is actually from $100 billion to $250 billion. And they don't care.

      The difference between ACA and the wall is that the ACA actually saved millions of lives and brought an undeniable boon to the economy in terms of people able to work and make money. The wall is easily sidestepped by a $1 hacksaw, as has been proven upthread, thus it has 0 utility.

      I find it funny how the right love to trot out the unemployment numbers, which are 99.99% Obama's work, which at the time they claimed were all "faked" and that the actual employment rate was closer to 40%. Trump takes over, and magically those fake numbers are real!

      Proof # 34950694 out of 8239845039458093486 that conservatives rely 100% on feelings, and discard facts as often as possible.

    243. Re: Trump owns it by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Not an emergency? Hundreds of thousands of people illegally crossing the border every year is a-ok hunky dory normal?

      Illegal immigration is down. By a very large amount. It can't be an emergency when it's already dropping.

      Also, that hundreds of thousands number requires counting people seeking amnesty as illegally entering the country. US law and treaty obligations make it legal to enter the US to seek amnesty. We are required by law and treaty to let them live into the US while we investigate their claim. And, FYI, the vast majority of asylum seekers 1) report to ICE as required during the investigation (96%) and 2) have their asylum claims approved.

      It turns out people don't abandon everything and walk 2000 miles on a whim.

      Since you are the one to mention numbers, exactly what number of uneducated useless third worlders from socialist shit holes invading our country would be an emergency for you?

      Well, the number would have to be going up instead of dropping substantially. It's also currently 1/3rd the rate in the 80s and 90s, when it wasn't an emergency that required bypassing the Constitution.

      And exactly why is it ok if even a single person illegally crosses the border?

      Ask the people who employ them. That's the only reason the actual "illegal immigrants" are coming here. No jobs, no immigrants.

      I've yet to see anyone on your side propose cracking down on the people who hire undocumented workers. Almost like our agricultural industries have used cheap undocumented labor for more than a century....Oh wait, they have!!

      Stupid children in your college echo chambers. Once you start paying taxes you will understand.

      As a 40-something who's been paid very well for a very long time, I'm reasonably sure I've paid more in taxes than you have. I also didn't have to resort to strawmen and caricatures to talk about this.

    244. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh? Obama issued fewer executive orders than Bush (both of them), Clinton, Reagan, and many others before him. Trump has so far issued more in 2 years than Obama did in 8. Obama set no precedents here.

    245. Re:Trump owns it by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Continuing Resolution.

      The politicians can't agree on an actual budget like the constitution requires, so they agree to just keep throwing the same amount of money they've been throwing at a particular department.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    246. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference, that I'm sure you're aware of (anyone with an IQ above 30 is eminently aware of this fact), but purposefully ignoring, is that the ACA has already saved well over $10 trillion to American taxpayers in the form of medical expenses. It's an expense that visibly and directly benefits every US taxpayer. The wall does nothing of that sort, is only intended to stop the smallest percentage of traffic across the border (roughly 3% of illegal immigration is foot traffic), and unless you live in a dilapidated shack, WILL continue to cost billions a year to maintain, especially after one of the handful of foot traffic immigrants brings a wire snip or hacksaw to dismantle the wall in mere seconds.

    247. Re:Trump owns it by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      He had two years with house republicans to get that wall. But now that the Democrats have the house, NOW it's suddenly THEIR fault? Did the Democrats shut down the government? No, Trump did. Period. End of Story. The Democrats are not holding 800k lives in the balance. Trump is. Period. End of Story. Trump is basically acting like a terrorist, and the democrats are doing exactly what they should be doing and refusing to negotiate under duress.

      Here now, Trump isn't the only one to blame here. Others share a great deal of this blame, ...like Mitch McConnell.

    248. Re:Trump owns it by BranMan · · Score: 1

      Nice point PR - the very FIRST thing that should have been done once the SS "crisis" was announced was to remove the Cap on payroll taxes. Hell, I make enough to exceed the cap, so I get a little extra at the end of the year. Remove the cap and I wouldn't miss it in the least. I don't even expect any extra benefits when I retire - leave those the same. Let those that can give a little extra do so - at a flat rate for all.

      Seems fair enough to me. I've got no problem being part of a solution.

    249. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they are in the country ILLEGALLY, meaning there are already laws against them being in the country. Instead of passing more legislation why don't we enforce the laws already on the books... wait, where have I heard that argument before? Ah. Hypocrites gotta hypocrite, I guess.

    250. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I find amazing is how quickly Trump apologists use arguments that undermine the base of their previous arguments. I was beat over the head for years of ACA with "Well, Obama had the Congress and the Senate for 2 years and he couldn't even get it done then" along with the 2nd Amendment ammosexual argument of "Well, we should just enforce the laws we already have." Yet when it comes to illegal immigration, suddenly they get amnesia and want more laws and forget who controlled congress for the last 2 years.
      Oh? Did Democrats obstruct? Wonder where they learned that from?

    251. Re:Trump owns it by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      I do large-scale security and risk mitigation for a living, and have done for more than two decades. I know a thing or two about walls, locks, and people.

      Trump's idea of a 'big, beautiful wall' would be as effective as the TSA. That is to say, completely useless at the task it was designed for, while making the entire situation worse.

      The whole wall concept (and to be fair, not even remotely first conceived by Trump) is worse than throwing the baby out with the bath water - it's throwing the baby out and keeping the bath water. Is it very nearly the worst possible idea for addressing the problem, and is not just a waste of money - it's actively contributing to the problem.

    252. Re:Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...It's not the same thing as robbing a bank.

      So only laws that benefit the banks should be enforced. Gotcha.

    253. Re: Trump owns it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard a segment on NPR a month or two ago about a flaming liberal household doing just that (inviting 2 immigrant families in). They never claimed the venture was cash positive, though.

    254. Re:Trump owns it by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Well, obviously.... NOT.

      You may say you are an expert, but in border controls? What kinds of things do you claim to protect?

      We have walls around prisons, we have walls on the border now, shall we just rip these down? IF they are not effective as you say and you really are an expert then tell us how to proceed? No physical barriers? No fences? What?

      I dare say that if you listened to what the guy was actually saying and not the democratic talking points, you'd find that he's being reasonable and thoughtful about what he's intending to do with the 5.7 Billion. IF you listen to the border patrol experts, they are ASKING for the wall to be extended and improved, I think we should give them what they are asking for myself. Besides, I"m of the opinion that "expert" advice usually amounts to the application of common sense and unless the "expert" can clearly explain why their advice is good and it flies in the face of the obvious (like walls work), they are just blowing smoke.

      No offence, but until you clearly explain what you'd do and why the wall doesn't help, I'm not going to accept your "expert" advice as valid, but as an appeal to the logic of saying "I know more than you, so I'm right" kind of logical fallacy. Care to change that impression?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    255. Re:Trump owns it by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      I wish I could +1 in threats that I've commented in.

    256. Re: Trump owns it by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Trump seems to think it's worth it.

    257. Re: Trump owns it by reanjr · · Score: 1

      You could absolutely keep your doctor under the ACA. But there are two parties in a free market.

  2. Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out of those 800,000 people, are there enough people with student loans, mortages, CC balances, and other normal debts, that when they stop paying them could be the catalyst to another debt crisis?

  3. Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Troll

    "Delta Air Lines Inc Chief Executive Ed Bastian, for instance, said the shutdown would cost his airline $25 million in lost revenue from government travel"

    Delta had over $41 BILLION in revenue last year. I get it that everyone hates Trump, but this whole thing is wildly overblown.

    1. Re:Overblown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's true, this one single datum tells us all other points of data are completely irrelevant and this government shutdown is good for everyone, actually.

    2. Re:Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Well it is odd to put the "single datum" in the summary when it represents 0.06% of revenue impact. Were there better examples? Apparently not.

    3. Re:Overblown by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only thing I see listed in the summary that I care about might be food inspection. All the other stuff is big industry financial crap, boohoo. I still have electricity, internet (when did this become that important), and mail service. The stores and businesses are open. Police are on the job. Cities still have water and gas. Life goes on. When it starts to effect things like that then it might matter to the little guy.

    4. Re:Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      But..but...companies are having problems "opening up the IPO market" and Delta lost 0.06% of their revenue. My heart goes out.

    5. Re:Overblown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Extrapolating from a bad example within a poorly-written summary to the shutdown as a whole and declare its effects overblown makes you a fucking retard.

    6. Re:Overblown by ledow · · Score: 1

      It's not been a month yet.

      $25m x 12 = $300m.

      Which is a nearly 1% of their revenue. That's not "nothing". In terms of profit, it may well hurt a lot more - they still have to have planes sitting around doing nothing, and maybe pay pilots. But their REVENUE was hit by at least 1% in doing so, but their costs now.

      Delta reported $1.3bn profit a quarter. That means that 1% revenue hit likely means a multi-percent hit to profits, if not more. That's not "nothing". Sure, they're all big numbers, but not nothing. You'd have to declare that to shareholders, for instance.

      And when the recent hurricanes cost them more than that, you can literally compare the money lost from the shutdown to that of a natural disaster.

    7. Re:Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      OK, so if the shutdown lasts A FULL YEAR it impacts NEARLY 1% of revenue? Yeah, major crises here. That is your example? You are grasping at straws here, and your logic of how it impacts profits more than revenue is nonsensical. They better figure this out soon, otherwise Delta might make only $4.999B this year instead of $5B.

    8. Re:Overblown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol i know right? like, sorry senior citizens whose housing assistance is in jeopardy, i'm playing this wicked small violin for you. get off your butts you lazy fat cats, this shutdown hasn't even hit the little people yet.

    9. Re:Overblown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Delta reported $1.3bn profit a quarter. That means that 1% revenue hit likely means a multi-percent hit to profits, if not more.

      You are conflating revenue with profit. To calculate the hit to their profit via reduction in revenue, you need to know their earnings to expenditure ratio. That ratio doesn't increase the percentage of profit loss, it reduces it.

    10. Re:Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Really. What effect has the government shutdown had on YOU? I'll wait. But somehow this is the crises of the century...

    11. Re:Overblown by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      Please name these senior citizens. Oh wait, nothing has happened to them. But THINK of the children, right???

    12. Re:Overblown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nothing happened to ME, SPECIFICALLY, so it's not important!"

    13. Re:Overblown by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Yes and they'll still have to pay fixed costs, but not variable costs. $25 million of variable costs at $60k annual average salary is...416 jobs.

    14. Re:Overblown by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      Might wanna consider aircraft are no longer being inspected. We'd kinda like those to stay in the sky.

      Also, all the "little guys" getting hurt are the businesses that are not receiving money from federal workers. Not going out to lunch if you're not getting paid. Which means they aren't big enough for headlines, at least until the mass bankruptcies and business failures start rolling in.

    15. Re:Overblown by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      OK, so if the shutdown lasts A FULL YEAR it impacts NEARLY 1% of revenue?

      Are you assuming that the ONLY impact of the shutdown is government travel? Isn't it kind of unwarranted?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  4. TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Making America Great Again. Congrats.

    1. Re:TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      By ... making it essentially unable to function.

      Hell, this guy is better than ISIS ever could be! I mean, even blowing up two skyscrapers only shut down the country for a day, not for a full month!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, Trump has accomplished Occupy Wall Street's wet dreams. With a complicit pack of smug Democrats leading the charge no less.

  5. New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by DatbeDank · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the government can't be assed to get it self running properly, then anything that previously requires some government oversight should be allowed to move forward without the shutdown government holding them back.

    Delayed IPO? Go on ahead with going public.
    New Drug? Not a problem, do your studies and use some good judgement. Besides if you fail you get sued which is a nice trade off.
    Tax Payments? Sucks to be you government, can't figure yourself out your crap can't get paid.
    Airport Security? No more lines at the airport.
    Air traffic Control? Anarchy of the skies!

    The last one was a joke. ATC should be airport employees and not FAA employees like how it is in everywhere else in the world.

    1. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Besides if you fail you get sued which is a nice trade off.

      I agree the government's failure to review and approve lawful applications within X days
      (No more than, for example, 10 days) should result in automatic forced approval.

      The risk of being sued requires the courts to be funded and operating, which they probably won't be for too longer.

    2. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      New Drug? Not a problem, do your studies and use some good judgement. Besides if you fail you get sued which is a nice trade off.

      Right, and when people are killed, or are seriously injured I'm sure they'll just be happy to get money in exchange.

      Airport Security? No more lines at the airport.

      Terrorists win!

    3. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fail get sued is silly. "corporations are people" So the corp goes under and ceases to exist, the VCs and founders however can use loopholes and a good lawyer to get off scott free; possibly even with some profits if it can't be clawed back.

    4. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Courts could be self-funding, they collect fines and fees.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Courts could be self-funding, they collect fines and fees.

      What could possibly go wrong...

    6. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Terrorists win!
      Wrong. The terrorists win by us having airport security at all.
      We win if we take it back.

    7. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by werepants · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This right here is the problem with modern politics. People like you have given no real thought to what life was actually like 100+ years ago, and sit and criticize the foundations of the very institution that allows you to be a complacent armchair critic in the first place.

      Without government, there's a good chance you wouldn't be literate.
      Without government, we wouldn't have had the research dollars (or more importantly) the free speech protections that enable science and ultimately lead to things like the computer and network infrastructure that you are using to bitch and moan.
      Without government, you would stand a very good chance of not being here in the first place, thanks to childhood mortality prior to sanitation mandates, food inspection, food stamps and vaccination requirements lowering childhood mortality from 300/1000 in the early 1900's to less than 1/1000 today.
      Without government, there would be nothing to keep anybody who wanted to from taking all of your possessions, or enslaving you, or just killing you for entertainment.
      Without government, companies can and will put things like radium in your beverage, they will put workers in harm's way to save a few bucks, and they will keep you busy 16 hours a day, 7 days a week so you don't have time to post ignorant rants on the internet in the first place.

      Life was brutal and short prior to effective government. There are still plenty of places today that are governed weakly or not at all, and childhood mortality remains extremely high in these places.

      The problem is, making big changes to life requires years or even generations - you don't build up an economy in a month, and you don't destroy it in a month. You don't produce a vibrant scientific community, or a skilled workforce, or a powerful military, or an innovative tech sector without serious patience and investment. But people like you swallow the GOP's bullshit line that "government IS the problem" without giving a moment's thought to the real sources of prosperity - those being stability, knowledge, trade, and liberty.

      If you want to live in a place without a powerful, liberal government, go ahead - even in this day and age, there are plenty of countries like that available. But don't sabotage mine because you're too shortsighted to understand where your comfortable life comes from.

    8. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

      So you are looking forward to government workers losing their homes? You are looking forward to the economy entering a recession and thousands of others losing their jobs?

      WTF is wrong with you?

      Are you a Trump Traitor?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    9. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some airport security is needed. But having us searched at the gate makes more sense since we have to wait there anyway. People who show up just before the flight are the ones who could be profiled and given special screening. The rest of us can play with the bomb sniffing trainee puppies.

    10. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      conflict of interest.

    11. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh yes, the classic false dichotomy ," if government was good back then, then obviously more is better!"

      To me this looks more like you are using the classic strategy 'lie like a rug about the opponent's arguments'. Again. Classic R and DT Gish Galop.

    12. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup I am and I hope you are on one of them!

    13. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you a dumbass? No one is forcing these people to not work somewhere else. If one of us non-government employees was told 'sorry, no paycheck' we'd go look for another job...

    14. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      It's more like "you'll lose the pension we promised you if you don't agree to work for a random length of time without pay." Situation is not good -- people should be paid for the work they do, regardless of politics.

    15. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by DatbeDank · · Score: 0

      And good riddance! It's time for those silly pensions to give way to what the rest of the US has: 401Ks.

    16. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by kenh · · Score: 1

      I agree the government's failure to review and approve lawful applications within X days
      (No more than, for example, 10 days) should result in automatic forced approval.

      Holy crap, do you have any idea what's involved in submitting a drug for approval? If printed, the documentation would easily fill several 53' long tractor-trailers - ten days?

      --
      Ken
    17. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Because that's working so well for your police.

    18. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would a government worker loose their home? This is just like when any other employer fails to pay: the workers can choose to stick it out with uncertainty or go find another job - either temporary or permanent. Pretending that government workers have no other choice than to sit around being unpaid is just lies and stupidity - if that's their caliber than it's no one's fault but their's that they aren't able to pay their mortgage.

    19. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, do you have any idea what's involved in submitting a drug for approval? If printed, the documentation would easily fill several 53' long tractor-trailers - ten days?

      I think what you say demonstrates the necessity of a time limit for dutiful review of drug approvals, etc, even more.... 53' long tractor-trailers worth of paperwork for approval of a newly discovered drug is insanely unreasonable: by having a time limit, the agency will be forced to either tone down the requirements to what can be reasonably reviewed in a reasonable amount of time, OR massively increase their staffing. For one thing, if I happen to discover an effective drug on my own, develop it into a product, and prove that it works and doesn't kill people, say in my own lab not working for some big pharma company, there's no way on earth to afford a 53' long tractor-trailer's worth of paperwork to support the application to bring my product to market.
      That's what you call government imposing an unreasonable burden on inventors and entrepreneurs.

    20. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People should be paid for the work they do, regardless of politics.

      And they should not be paid for work that they did not do either. Those that stick it out and go back to their job after the shutdown should *not* be given back pay. They should be allowed to work overtime and be paid time-and-a-half (or whatever is appropriate), but they should not be paid for work that they did not do. This creates a situation where government employment doesn't obey market forces and creates conflicts of interest at the burden of the citizens.

    21. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Well... it would make sense if both Plaintiff and Defendant had to fork sufficient $$ over
      to fund the court before a case begins, and whichever side loses pays, effectively.

      The court is getting paid the same no matter which side wins, and even in state cases the DA/prosecutor
      is a different department, and they'll be required to pay, so no conflict.

    22. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by werepants · · Score: 1

      Ahh yes, the classic false dichotomy ," if government was good back then, then obviously more is better!"

      Ahh yes, the classic strawman - mischaracterize my argument and then attack that mischaracterization. Shutdown is bad != more government is always better, and I never claimed otherwise. But you're a fool if you think there won't be serious (potentially life and death) consequences for allowing people to bypass important oversight indiscriminately.

      A modest roll back of government regulations is a good thing.

      This is like saying "a modest roll back of computer code is a good thing". Code is good to the extent that it works well, and bad if it doesn't. Regulations are exactly the same. Regulation in and of itself is neither good nor bad - it depends on how well it is working. We should get rid of regulations that are ineffective or detrimental, and we should protect regulations that are doing their jobs properly, and especially if they are playing a critical role. If the FAA or FDA regulations vanish, people will be hurt.

      And I say this as a liberal. Looking forward to many more months of a government shutdown.

      If you're a liberal, you're doing a shitty job of it. There are a lot of NASA scientists, technicians, engineers, and countless others who are getting financially wrecked by this shutdown, through no fault of their own, and you're an asshole for hoping that it continues.

    23. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And good riddance! It's time for those silly pensions to give way to what the rest of the US has: 401Ks.

      Good riddance indeed! It's time to stop paying people what you said you'd pay them for the work they did. It's what Trump's famous for and now he's president the government should do it to.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    24. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      ATC should be airport employees

      ATC also controls the skies between the airports. A plane is only talking to an airport ATC at the beginning or end of the flight. The rest of the time it's talking to an ATC that covers a large chunk of the US, or the oceans surrounding it.

    25. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      If they're salaried, they should be paid their agreed annual pay. It's not their fault that they weren't called into work.

    26. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmmm... that's a great idea. Next time some (R) complains about too much government, tell them - If you think LESS government is the answer, MOVE somewhere that has less government.

    27. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      I disagree, U don't want government to have employees or salaries, so AFAIC all government workers should never be paid.

    28. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      Not only do I want it to continue, I want it to become a permanent shutdown. I want the government employees to lose their pensions that were promised at the expense of the general public by the power of the vote of those very government employees.

      I want government to be annihilated, not just decimated. Not every tenth, every single government employee must be fired, all departments shut the fuck down. I want individuals to have power, not collectives. Fuck the collectives, only individuals matter and no collective should be allowed to reign over the individuals.

    29. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Cool story bro. You know places like that already exist, have you looked into housing there? You can even enjoy your free market cholera.

    30. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only do I want it to continue, I want it to become a permanent shutdown. I want the government employees to lose their pensions that were promised at the expense of the general public by the power of the vote of those very government employees.

      I want government to be annihilated, not just decimated. Not every tenth, every single government employee must be fired, all departments shut the fuck down. I want individuals to have power, not collectives. Fuck the collectives, only individuals matter and no collective should be allowed to reign over the individuals.

      I used to think you were merely stupid. You have now proven to also be completely insane.

    31. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      ATC should be airport employees and not FAA employees like how it is in everywhere else in the world.

      No it's not. Most western countries have air traffic control employeed by a central authority tied in some way to the government, either as a government department (e.g. Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland, or Direction des Services de la navigation aérienne) or as a wholely government owned company (e.g. Air Services Australia).

    32. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Without government, companies can and will put things like radium in your beverage

      Now to be perfectly fair, radium was in your beverages not because of lack of government, but because all people including governments thought it was good for you. Doctors were prescribing radium as a miracle cure for all sorts of things and when it became cost effective enough to extract then companies started putting into water and marketing it as a cure.

    33. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by fropenn · · Score: 1

      One quibble. The infant mortality rate in the United States in 2017 (deaths per 1,000 live births), was 5.8. Which, by historical standards, is pretty good.

      Yet by modern standards, this rate puts the U.S. 56th in the world in infant mortality, tied with Serbia, and just behind Bosnia and Herzegovina, Latvia, and Slovakia. Still plenty of opportunity for the U.S. to improve in this area.

      In terms of individual states, California and New York have some of the best infant mortality rates in the U.S. (4.2 and 4.6, respectively), while Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Oklahoma have some of the worst rates in the U.S. (all greater than 7), which on an international comparison puts them in a range similar to Kuwait, Lebanon, Ukraine, and Macedonia.

    34. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by werepants · · Score: 1

      Touche - interesting factoid. That said, I think the point still stands: how do we know better now? Because we've gotten more rigorous and knowledgeable about the things we put in our food. And that rigor and knowledge is directly sponsored and/or enforced by government.

    35. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by werepants · · Score: 1

      One quibble. The infant mortality rate in the United States in 2017 (deaths per 1,000 live births), was 5.8. Which, by historical standards, is pretty good.

      Thanks for clarifying, I eyeballed a graph for those figures so the precision was low.
       

      In terms of individual states, California and New York have some of the best infant mortality rates in the U.S. (4.2 and 4.6, respectively), while Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Oklahoma have some of the worst rates in the U.S. (all greater than 7), which on an international comparison puts them in a range similar to Kuwait, Lebanon, Ukraine, and Macedonia.

      The effective government/low infant mortality correlation seems to be surprisingly reliable between countries, between time periods, and even between individual states as you point out.

    36. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by werepants · · Score: 1

      Cool, thanks for making it apparent that you are a shortsighted, delusional misanthrope. Go live in Somalia or Syria or whatever war-torn, dysfunctional country you prefer - I guarantee you won't be harassed by an oppressive nanny state and all those despicable public services.

    37. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Courts could be self-funding, they collect fines and fees.

      Right, and why don't we just go a bit further and we can start paying bonuses to judges and prosecutors for producing more fines. Somehow I don't think you've really thought this through..

    38. Re:New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That said, I think the point still stands

      Absolutely! I'm just calling out radium as an incorrect example. I'd be more looking to how health regulations limit what can and can't be done with food, and while the USA is not strong at it, the rest of the world has fought a battle with producers to stop jacking up their animals with growth hormones to make an extra buck.

    39. Re: New Legislation - Gov Can't Hold Back Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want the government employees to lose their pensions that were promised at the expense of the general public by the power of the vote of those very government employees.

      Their pensions are part of the deal for working for the government. The pay is poor but the pension - which is funded largely by mandatory employee contributions - is assured. They had a choice to make, they could have worked in the private sector instead if they wanted but chose to work for the government. Why do you aspire to break the deal that they signed on to? Would you do the same to retired soldiers and their pensions that were part of their enlistment agreement?
       
       

      Not every tenth, every single government employee must be fired, all departments shut the fuck down.

      So we can have a government run by one person, who is ruler for life and accountable to nobody? No, we rebelled against that back in the 1700s - we don't want to go back to it. It takes work - and people - to make a functional government. If you want a theocracy instead you can find one somewhere else.

  6. Another non-tech article by Vanyle · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why is everything here getting so political? I read about this on every other news feeds, I don't need it here as well.

    1. Re:Another non-tech article by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is everything here getting so political? I read about this on every other news feeds, I don't need it here as well.

      Then WHY did you click on this story and post a comment?

      It's not like it wasn't readily apparent what this story was about and what the comments would look like.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Another non-tech article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because the soulless entities that took control of /. after CmdrTaco's departure wanted to see a return on their investment, and that included polluting a once pristine feed with clickbait. Anger drives page-views better than actual nerd-stuff, so now we have Shitdot, the site where everyone just swears at each other. This place may as well be a youtube comment section now.

    3. Re:Another non-tech article by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the Republican party is now run by an admitted racist, sexist, senile bastard.

      The rest of the Republican party openly pisses on the constitution by doing things like preventing a sitting President from appointing Justices to the Supreme Court.

      This is the new way: once the Republic ass hats return to the normalcy of at least pretending to be bi-partisan then the Slashdot world will return to more of a normalcy.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    4. Re:Another non-tech article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The worst illiterate is the political illiterate, he doesn’t hear, doesn’t speak, nor participates in the political events. He doesn’t know the cost of life, the price of the bean, of the fish, of the flour, of the rent, of the shoes and of the medicine, all depends on political decisions. The political illiterate is so stupid that he is proud and swells his chest saying that he hates politics. The imbecile doesn’t know that, from his political ignorance is born the prostitute, the abandoned child, and the worst thieves of all, the bad politician, corrupted and flunky of the national and multinational companies."

        Bertolt Brecht

    5. Re:Another non-tech article by Parker+Lewis · · Score: 1

      Stuff that matters.

    6. Re:Another non-tech article by kenh · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the Republican party is now run by an admitted racist, sexist, senile bastard.

      CItation? You do understand what "admitted" means, right? It means Trump, himself, said out loud that he is a "racist"... I doubt you've got that, but I'm open to your support of that claim.

      --
      Ken
    7. Re:Another non-tech article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to Slashdot. You must be new here.

    8. Re:Another non-tech article by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

      Trump Traitor, yes, maybe I shouldn't have said admitted. Who really cares?

      Trump's obvious and noted racism is documented public knowledge at this point. Here's a couple random links:

      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/us/politics/omarosa-donald-trump-racial-slur.html

      http://thesource.com/2018/07/26/trump-n-word/

      Or just read the Wikipedia page where is racism is documented:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    9. Re:Another non-tech article by Vanyle · · Score: 1

      Because I assumed it was going to be news for nerds, stuff that mattered.

    10. Re:Another non-tech article by Vanyle · · Score: 1

      Why is everyone talking about politics in my comment about to much politics?

    11. Re:Another non-tech article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is everything here getting so political? I read about this on every other news feeds, I don't need it here as well.

      Yeah, you signed up for Stormfront for Linux Cunts. It was a deliberate act and you knew what you were doing. I only hope that someday it comes back to haunt you personally or blight your career in some way.

    12. Re:Another non-tech article by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Because I assumed it was going to be news for nerds, stuff that mattered.

      If you believe the government shutdown is not something that matters then maybe you should actually go through and read these comments you criticse.

    13. Re:Another non-tech article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is the new way: once the Republic ass hats return to the normalcy of at least pretending to be bi-partisan then the Slashdot world will return to more of a normalcy."

      "Peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism" - Karl Marx

      The problem is that you're here instead of The Militant.

  7. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Trump derangement syndrome. Their hatred for him runs so deep that they're willing to do a complete 180 on border security just to stick it to him, the rest of us be damned.

  8. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, I guess they'll just have to get private sector jobs, boohoo.

  9. Thanks, Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Everything is still his fault, right?

  10. Syndicates. by RyanFenton · · Score: 2

    Reminds me of a LOT of cyberpunk scenarios, where international companies and mobs start carving up nations, using people's conservative traditions to make a mockery of everything those traditions mean, in order to take everything from them.

    Explains that odd twist in the smile that pops up on Republican faces when they tell bald-faced lies more than most anything else.

    Ryan Fenton

    1. Re:Syndicates. by dehachel12 · · Score: 2

      using people's conservative traditions to make a mockery of everything those traditions mea

      like christmas being a celebration of materialism?

    2. Re:Syndicates. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing is that the ONLY times in history when someone used people's values and traditions and turned them against them was borne out of socialism. Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Chavez all appealed to people's disdain for corporations and government and willingness to give up everything for 'free stuff'. Your life may be miserable, but it would be a lot more miserable if you believe the government can help you, at least (healthy market) corporations have limits and a reason to keep themselves in line - competition, governments have no limit and few governments are willing to compete with other governments.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    3. Re:Syndicates. by RyanFenton · · Score: 1

      Not really - as the other poster alluded to, all throughout history, traditions like Christmas were used in all kinds of ways. Traditions are partly rules, used as rules tend to be used.

      In the age of Mercantilism, pilgrim groups were pushed to give to their causes and trading partners, but to ask for little, and never show any extravagance for the riches they were shipping back.

      That's basically making virtue and tradition out of feudalistic ideals. Really a classic reproduction of the cyberpunk view of mobs and corporate syndicates.

      There's lots of examples of that same dynamic, right back to the origin of written history in places like Babylon where they tallied crop taxes using religion and men with sticks to beat those not playing along.

      That's part of why the ideal when splitting from Britain was a separation of church and state - to sever the cruel links between of control between the sacred and the state, to strengthen both for the common good.

      Smashing them both together to pocket the result is kind of returning to a dark past we put away for good reasons. It's why we keep telling the same cyberpunk stories about what happens when we cross those lines completely.

      Ryan Fenton

    4. Re:Syndicates. by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      somebody gets it.

    5. Re:Syndicates. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like rain on your wedding day

    6. Re:Syndicates. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not surprising that almost all of your examples of "socialism" are actually far right ultra privatized corporatocracy. Hitler, Franco, Mussolini; all fascists, and irrefutably far right by any metric you choose to measure it. There's a reason the word privatization was created to describe Hitler, Franco, and Mussolini's economic agenda.

      Pol Pot was also extremely right wing, by all objective measures. Do some research and you will learn this. Chavez is "kinda" socialist in the sense of nationalizing oil, but over 80% of Venezuela's economy is still owned by foreign entities, so it's arguably about 20% socialist. Stalin was the only valid example you provided, and he actually reversed ALL of the traditionalistic ways Russia operated. And considering that plenty of new declassified evidence has pointed out that Stalin's body counts aren't even 1/100th of what Western propaganda has claimed, he is not exactly proving your point. Also remember that over 70% of Eastern Europeans who lived in a socialist state would prefer to return to one. That should be telling enough by itself.

  11. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over 2/3 of illegal immigrants in the USA enter through the normal points of entry and overstay their visa.

    Why is building an expensive wall that requires taking people's property via eminent domain while doing nothing to address the vast majority of illegal immigration more important to Republicans than America's jobs? Really makes you wonder...

    Just kidding. We already know the answer is "racism"

  12. Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Actually in the last couple of days Schumer and Pelosi have both said they won't work with Trump under ANY circumstances to open the government. Those 800,000 employees must be so important to them they won't even talk with the president about it.

    At this point its the Schumer Shutdown Part 2.

    1. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      You can't just blame it on Schumer, though, because budget bills have to start in the House. So far, the Democrats have refused to even consider writing a budget.

      Not, this is the Democrat Shutdown. After the turned down Trump's deal before he even made it, they took complete ownership of this. There's no way any rational person can blame Trump. He's trying to negotiate - has been trying to negotiate this entire time - and the Democrats as a party refuse to listen to him. There's no way you can blame Trump - he's not the one refusing to make a deal.

    2. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Republicans have had FULL CONTROL of the House, the Senate, and the White House for two years; they could have appropriated 50 billion for a wall had they wanted to, and the Democrats would have been powerless to stop it. Please tell us again how the Democrats having control of the House for the last two weeks has somehow precipitated this "crisis", and how it's Democratic intransigence that's the cause of the problem. Go ahead, looking forward to your answer.

    3. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the budget bill that Democrats passed doesn't count?

    4. Re:Schumer Shutdown by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      So far, the Democrats have refused to even consider writing a budget.

      The president is the one who is supposed to submit the budget in the US system. Don't they teach US civics over there?

      There's no way you can blame Trump - he's not the one refusing to make a deal.

      The Democratic House has already passed several bills to reopen the government in the past couple of weeks. The Senate GOP won't even allow a vote on them.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Republicans have had FULL CONTROL of the House, the Senate

      No, they had a Majority, not a Supermajority, your statement is incorrect and misleading and shows an utter lack of understanding as to how our government actually works.

    6. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be the one that the Senate Democrats blocked from being voted on, so no it doesn't count.

    7. Re: Schumer Shutdown by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They didn't NEED a supermajority to pass a simple bill, it's not like Trump was going to veto it. Fact is, you're just distracting from the absolute truth of what I said: The Republicans could have done this at any time if they had wanted to, and nobody could have stopped them -- except themselves.

    8. Re: Schumer Shutdown by buswolley · · Score: 1

      Trump does not have to try. He coukd sign the bill that is ready for him to sign. A bill that opens the gov.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    9. Re: Schumer Shutdown by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Please explain how Senate Democrats can block something from being voted on. I double-dog dare ya.

    10. Re: Schumer Shutdown by FuzzyDaddy2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, the house did pass a budget, as soon as the new congress started. It was the same budget the senate passed a few weeks ago. Right now Mitch McConnell refuses to bring it up for a vote because the president is wonâ(TM)t sign it.

    11. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is NO BILL to sign. It hasn't passed the House and Senate, it doesn't exist. People telling you different are LYING to you and hope you are so fucking stupid you repeat it without checking it out. Looks like they were correct about you.

    12. Re:Schumer Shutdown by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So far the only person who has tried to end the shutdown is President Trump. [...] This is officially the Democrats' Shutdown.

      Trump took ownership of the shutdown on national television. Troll detected.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It take 2/3 of the senate to vote on Cloture i.e. to end debate on a bill. If there is no Cloture, the bill goes into eternal debate limbo, at least until that term of Congress ends.

    14. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Smidge204 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Should be noted that the bill mentioned passed UNANIMOUSLY. 100 for, 0 against, 0 abstaining. So even if the handful of new senators all vote against, the bill would have veto-proof majority.

      The Senate should pass the bill like it did a month ago and send it to the President. If he vetoes it, they could easily have the votes to override the veto.

      But that would make the GOP look bad, so that's not an option for McConnell.
      =Smidge=

    15. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can't just blame it on Schumer, though, because budget bills have to start in the House.

      You can't blame Schumer at all. Mitch McConnell controls what bills come up for a vote.

      So far, the Democrats have refused to even consider writing a budget.

      That is the President's job. Current law (31 U.S.C. 1105(a)) requires the president to submit a budget no earlier than the first Monday in January, and no later than the first Monday in February. Typically, presidents submit budgets on the first Monday in February.

      He has over a week to do it.

      The House has passed multiple spending bills to end the shutdown since the new Congress was started. They're going to do it again tomorrow.

      Not, this is the Democrat Shutdown. After the turned down Trump's deal before he even made it, they took complete ownership of this.

      They knew Trump wasn't going to agree to open the government, but would instead repeat his demands. They were proven right. He also doubled down with a litany of false claims and exaggerations. Also expected.

      Why wait? You set your conditions, and don't make a stunt.

      The Democratic House wants the shutdown over. The Trump can propose his new budgets and they will discuss them.

      No threats. Trump? Trump threatened to shut down the government. He did.

      He is to blame.

      There's no way any rational person can blame Trump. He's trying to negotiate - has been trying to negotiate this entire time - and the Democrats as a party refuse to listen to him.

      Like many irrational people, you are confusing disagreement with listening.

      Democrats certainly refuse to agree with him, they can rationally recognize him for the lying hyperbolic conartist he is. His stunt with appearing on national television confirmed it.

      Sorry, but with a fraud like Trump, a firm hand is necessary and stern resolve.

      Wise up, Emperor Trump is standing stark naked.

      There's no way you can blame Trump - he's not the one refusing to make a deal.

      Trump is refusing to sign the bills unless his demands are met. He is refusing to talk with Congress under a normal state of affairs. The Turtle is refusing to hold a vote in the Senate.

      We've listened to him. We've heard his demands. We've heard him take responsibility for his shutdown, then turn around and blame others after promising he wouldn't.

      You can't negotiate with a person like that.

      You have to work without them. Fortunately, he is soon to become irrelevant.

      The Turtle is going to be tipped over.

      .

    16. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when did Dems in the senate vote against it? I seem to recall that Mitch McConnell, (R) is in charge of the senate and he is refusing to so his job in bringing any budge bills to the floor. Even the one that passed before the election and Dems passed in thr house before the shutdown.

      So, on what date in the current Congress did Mitch put that to a floor vote?

      Don't give me any what aboutism answer that question.

    17. Re: Schumer Shutdown by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cloture votes only happen for bills that are actually brought to the floor, which McConnell didn't do; so, again, tell me about how Senate Democrats "blocked" this from being voted on?

    18. Re: Schumer Shutdown by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Good job. If you can't actually refute the truth, just insult the messenger.

    19. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple: They state with credibility that they will filibuster, and by doing so make it clear that any effort to call a vote would be blocked.

    20. Re:Schumer Shutdown by kenh · · Score: 0

      The president is the one who is supposed to submit the budget in the US system. Don't they teach US civics over there?

      The President PROPOSES a budget to Congress, Congress (The House in particular) controls government spending, and it is Congress that drafts the budget, passes it and sends it on to the Senate, who approves it and passes it on to the President to sign it.

      The President does not set the budget, and the President can not exercise a "line-item veto" on the budget put on his desk - he either signs or vetoes the entire bill.

      It's cute that you imagine the President sets the budget.

      The Democratic House has already passed several bills to reopen the government in the past couple of weeks. The Senate GOP won't even allow a vote on them.

      The bills spinning around in Congress fail to address the crisis at the border - ask the residents in Tijuana Mexico about the "manufactured crisis" at the border.

      Border walls work - if they didn't, why hasn't the wall near San Diego been taken down?

      My favorite video clip was of CNN's Jim Acosta, standing next to a section of border wall, arguing that there's no need for a border wall because there was no issue where he stood, in the shadow of the existing border wall.
       

      --
      Ken
    21. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, you're right there: the RINOs are addicted to their cheap & illegal labor force from Mexico. Trump acted as a true Republican, refusing to pass a bill that would have granted amnesty to illegal aliens. Both Dems and Repubs are guilty of not passing a suitable bill.

    22. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before he finished? They rejected it before he started speaking. They never even heard what the deal was before they rejected it.

      That's how strong TDS is on the left.

    23. Re:Schumer Shutdown by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trump then also proposed a compromise,

      It's not a compromise if he gets everything he wants, and especially not if the only thing he's giving back is the hostages.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Schumer Shutdown by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Of course, when you say "move even a little" you mean capitulate unconditionally to his temper tantrum.

    25. Re: Schumer Shutdown by jbengt · · Score: 1

      The fact that this above comment got voted up to +4 shows you how completely stupid the left is.
      ...
      To get a vote on a bill in the Senate requires 60 votes, which the GOP never had. To override a veto takes 67 votes in the Senate, something different.

      It takes 50 votes to pass a bill in the Senate.
      It takes 60 votes to prevent a filibuster in the Senate, but a budget bill cannot be filibustered.
      It does take 67 Senate votes (and 2/3 of the House) to override a presidential veto, but the continuing resolution bill passed the Senate with something like 98 yes votes before Trump changed his mind.

    26. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Trump won;t accept a budget unless it includes funding for his stupid pointless wall, and McConnell won;t even let a budget without it get to a vote in the senate.

      You can't give in to terrorists like Trump.

    27. Re: Schumer Shutdown by jbengt · · Score: 1

      No. It only takes 60 votes to pass a cloture motion, and you don't usually need to invoke cloture unless someone is trying to filibuster the bill.

    28. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Talderas · · Score: 2

      A budget bill cannot be filibustered. This is true but in order for that to be applicable a budget resolution has to be passed. No budget resolution was passed for FY2019 so there are zero appropriations bills for that fiscal year which are exempt from filibuster.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    29. Re:Schumer Shutdown by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Trump started the shutdown, by backing down on the continuing resolution bill he previously supported, which passed the Senate by a huge majority, but then wasn't brought up for another vote in the house until the Democrats took over, and now Mitch McConnell won't even allow it to be brought to a vote in the Senate. (They have to reconcile the original bills, which is why the Democrats tried to pass a version identical to the Senate bill.)

    30. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no 60 vote requirement to simply vote on a bill. There is a 3/5ths (currently 60 votes) requirement for a cloture vote to end a filibuster. If no one is filibustering, then they can bring bills to a vote and it only takes an ordinary majority to pass.

      The problem is that senators are lazy so they just say "filibuster" and then they all go home and have fancy parties with their lobbyist friends. Filibusters are naturally somewhat limited if you have people actually stand up and talk the whole time.

    31. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight. If I start punching you in the face repeatedly, and demand that you give me all your money in exchange for me to stop punching you in the face, you are responsible for getting punched in the face because you refuse to "compromise" by giving me all your money? In the real world, we call this a mugging.

    32. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >refute the truth

      Well, what he actually did was refute your stupid post, which was most definitely not truth, but you didn't make it to the fourth sentence to find that out:

      >To get a vote on a bill in the Senate requires 60 votes, which the GOP never had. To override a veto takes 67 votes in the Senate, something different.

      Please fuck off.

    33. Re:Schumer Shutdown by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      So far, the Democrats have refused to even consider writing a budget.

      The FY 2019 budget was supposed to be written by the Republicans, before October 1st, 2018. They failed at their jobs, despite having absolute control of the entire budgeting process.

      As for why not write a budget now, you can't do that when you can't talk to half of the government about their budget needs.

    34. Re:Schumer Shutdown by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trump then also proposed a compromise

      Trump "compromised" by promising to not do what court orders forbid him to do. Can't deport the DACA kids when courts have already told him he can't deport the DACA kids.

      I hereby compromise with you. I will not burn down your house. In return, I want $5.7 million dollars. Good deal, right?

    35. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would he use taxpayer dollars to open the government when those tax payers are expecting those dollars to fund security projecs.

    36. Re:Schumer Shutdown by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      The President submits a budget, which happened last year.

      You mean last year when Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    37. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which bill is it that is in front of him? I don't believe there is any active legislation on his desk at the moment.

    38. Re:Schumer Shutdown by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Trump then also proposed a compromise

      So if I kidnap your daughter then on a completely unrelated case ask you for $5bn, and then when you say no, offer to return your daughter for $5bn you consider me the one who made the compromise and the master negotiator? Or would you get angry before I finished speaking?

      Trump offered nothing that he didn't already take from the Democrats in the first place.

    39. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a lovely trick, isn't it? The Republicans filibuster so long and hard that the "liberal" media is claiming you NEED 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate, which is only true when you face the kind of rigid filibuster lock the Republicans created. (Made easier by not having to Mr. Smith or Green Eggs and Ham at the podium). Then the republicans cry that they can't meet their own threshold when it's convenient for them to not pass a bill. Because these are anarchists-they are either the rich who can afford the private armies, or the militiamen who want an excuse to shoot "urban" folk. They don't care that the government is shut down until the checks stop coming, which the Democrats try to prevent even when it is the red states that would get shafted.

    40. Re: Schumer Shutdown by Rolgar · · Score: 1

      You do realize that the Democrats would just filibuster any bill they didn't want which means they effectively have a veto over the Republicans doing any thing they wanted without bi-partisan participation or tacit approval. So if they said 'Absolutely no wall', there is no way the Republicans could force the issue without forcing the Democrats to actually fillibuster on the floor, and when was the last time the Senate majority forced the other party to actually do it?

    41. Re:Schumer Shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not American.

      On the international stage, Trump looks weak. He caved to Russia, He caved to North Korea, he caved on NAFTA, he's caved several times with China he keeps caving on things because he doesn't know how to be a politician. He is a bully and since the 80's the message has been "Don't give bullies attention." He hires and surrounds himself with incompetent nincompoops to make himself look better.

      Assuming I could do the job better, Telling Russia to fuck off would have been the right way to deal with Russia. DPRK requires diplomacy and Trump played the shotgun card, and got his face blown off. DPRK isn't going to get rid of their nukes, they're just going to hide them for a few years and then bring them out again the next time a US presidents change so they can squeeze more concessions from the sitting president. China knows how to play hardball and unlike the US, is not beholden to anyone to rule by fiat. Trump should never have done anything with NAFTA because the only winner in NAFTA is Canada, and only by virtue of holding Mexico's feet to the "higher wagez plz" fire. Fuck the Canadian dairy cartel. Nobody in Canada likes paying 40$/lb for cheese. Those Tariffs have so far cost the US economy more by making things more expensive, and doing absolutely nothing to the countries they've been imposed on, they can all trade with other countries with lower tariffs. If you want to see a permanent end to NAFTA stupidity, softwood lumber would need to be included, because that's a the annual pinata the US lumber cartel takes a swing at, and every time fails and does nothing to encourage competition inside the US.

      Basically Trump deserves the "Worst president ever" award. Any other person elected would have the sense to surround themselves with competent people, even if they're not from their own party. Trump hires smug morons he sees on fake news channels from TV who don't know shit to begin with. For all his cries about fake news, he sure loves hiring the best fakes.

      Captcha: corrupts

  13. Where do you get your information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I would like to subscribe to your newsletter, it's hilarious.

  14. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, so for 5 billion out of a 4 trillion dollar budget we can eliminate 2/3rds of illegal entries? That should be a no brainer! What kind of a person would be against such a cost effective solution?

  15. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

    Trump derangement syndrome. Their hatred for him runs so deep that they're willing to do a complete 180 on border security just to stick it to him, the rest of us be damned.

    You falsely imply that keeping illegal border crossings open is important to Democrats.

    First, it's not clear what it means for an "illegal border crossing" to be "kept open", but more importantly, the Democrats have already offered over a billion dollars to improve border security -- it's the $5.7B for a "wall" or "physical barrier" or "not a wall from sea to shining sea but merely a few improvements" that Trump's requesting that they're disagreeing with.

    I'd also like to point out that while the scope of Trump's proposed border security "solution" keeps shrinking, the price tag does not. If he needed $5.7B to "build the wall!", then why isn't it considerably cheaper to implement his newly scaled down plan?

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  16. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. Financial institutions are giving feds all kinds of options. They understand that that they aren't in the case of being unable to pay their debt, they are unable to pay their debt at this time.

  17. Re: Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why are democraps so hell bent on blocking the wall now when they used to support it?

  18. Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FDA, Air Traffic Control, Parks Service, etc are all needed. But yet the media chooses to harp on the plight of the poor TSA smurfs. You know, the people who say "papers please" before you're boarding a flight in your own country and make you pass through a nudie-scanner or get your crotch groped by them. Yeah, yeah, they're "just doing their jobs." Guess what? If no one was willing to do the job, the job wouldn't be so obnoxious.

    Keep everything else, but if TSA were all fired (but we kept real security measures like armed crew, air marshals, reinforced/locked flight deck doors, and a policy of non-cooperation with hijackers), and replaced with private security, it would be a net gain for freedom in the USA.

    As it is, the TSA was mostly created as corporate welfare for airlines. It took security out of their hands, thus washed their hands of liability. Strict ID checks also make re-sale of tickets more difficult, thus protect airlines' revenue stream from change fees.

    1. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Strict ID checks also make re-sale of tickets more difficult, thus protect airlines' revenue stream from change fees.

      Exactly. A complete scam. This whole "show your ID" thing is ridiculous.

    2. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      A scam, and they're not even particularly good at finding large knives, guns, and other things that are actually dangerous on board an aircraft. For a while, they were good at finding cash and turning the owners over to authorities (even when flying domestically where any amount of cash is legal). Checkers were basically bribed by police and DEA to look for cash. This actually reduced security, since they were biased to look for lucrative vs actually dangerous items.

    3. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the whole "show your ID" thing was even before the TSA. It was just a scam to keep people from transferring tickets. Now everyone wants to "see your ID" when checking into hotels or even entering buildings.

    4. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      ID checks for hotels are at least understandable since they wanted to know whom to bill for damage to a room if it happened. ID checks on airlines prior to 9/11 were a bit of a joke -- they'd accept a university ID or anything with a photo that vaguely looked like you.

    5. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As it is, the TSA was mostly created as corporate welfare for airlines.

      And also as a jobs program, which is now just one more thing Trump has broken.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TSA was created as a welfare program for the otherwise unemployable. Airlines were never liable for acts of terror, and security was never in their hands. Security was up to the airports, and is still up to the airports, and the airports alone.

      Get your facts straight.

    7. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by kenh · · Score: 1

      The TSA was created in large part to give the average traveler the sense that three or four guys with box cutters couldn't take over the plane and smash it into a big building to make a political point.

      --
      Ken
    8. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The TSA was created in large part to give the average traveler the sense that three or four guys with box cutters couldn't take over the plane and smash it into a big building to make a political point.

      Two or perhaps two point five things were needed for that: hardened cockpit doors (the point five is security procedures to go with them) and air marshals. People asked for and got those things, and that's all that was necessary to reassure them. We also got the TSA to keep people scared — they've never caught a single terrorist and they get failing grades every time we test their ability to catch guns or explosives, but they do manage to feel people up, look at their naked body on the scanner, and steal their bottled water, shampoo and lighters.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TSA was created as a welfare program for the otherwise unemployable. Airlines were never liable for acts of terror, and security was never in their hands. Security was up to the airports, and is still up to the airports, and the airports alone.

      Get your facts straight.

      Taking that on its face, why are Republicans so cracked that they insist on putting "the otherwise unemployable" between people and their travel? What's with the Calvinist demand that they slave in an office/security line to make shit worse for people when they can be home creating a hundred million works of art (which will be more Twilight and 50 Shades than Harry Potter, but it's still better than actively getting in the way)?

    10. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How short your memory must be. The TSA was created by an iron-clad, veto-proof, bipartisan vote in Congress. It was unanimous in the Senate and nearly so in the House.

      The Democrats own the TSA just as much as the Republicans do.

    11. Re:Screw the TSA, save everyone else. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Pedantic distinction without a difference, wanker.

  19. Yep, That's Anarchy by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Interesting

    and you won't like the results.

    Delayed IPO? Great Depression 2.0 New Drug? Snake Oil. Tax Payments? They already have your money, you won't get your refund. Airport Security? 9/11 2.0

    The FDA isn't inspecting food right now. If this keeps up sooner or later we're gonna have an outbreak. If you have small children they're going to die. Same if you're elderly.

    Folks really, really underestimate how important and beneficial the government is. That's because most of the time you're dealing with Government in your personal life it's taxes, tickets or the DMV.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: Yep, That's Anarchy by DatbeDank · · Score: 1

      Let's address this:

      1. How in God's name is an IPO going to cause depression 2.0? If Goldman and the other Banks underwrite a junk business that's on them and I recall a few IPOs that went under the open price. No depression there.

      2. You mean like all of the essential oil peddlers who have been claiming all sorts of things even before the government shutdown?

      3.The IRS has around $200 of my money because I correctly calculated how much I should send to the government. So no refunds aren't a big deal. If you're too lazy to figure it out yourself that's on you, not big gov to pay you back. thanks

      4. A second 9/11, are you even a slashdot poster ? Why don't you Google how many times people managed to sneak weapons past TSA. It's called security theater for a reason. Those nuddie scanners came from Michael Chertoffs company.

      5. Food safety? You mean like the time Bush reduced inspection visits or when Obama eliminated 60% of the inspectors for foreign meat on 2012?

      I'm not one to be a lolbertarian but if you think life's going to descend into anarchy without massive government oversight, I think you have bigger problems to contend to.

    2. Re:Yep, That's Anarchy by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      Hell I don't think that's really hitting it home enough. If a shutdown allowed business to run free, businesses would literally start lobbying to shutdown our government every chance they could get. They would literally spending millions on ads to incite enough anger on any one topic to force shutdowns all of the time. It literally rewards businesses for successfully launching campaigns to end or government on a continual basis. The entire point is to make it hurt when a the government shuts down so that people force the government to not do that, to reward people keeping it open. There needs to be a profit motive to keeping the government open, the second there isn't that, then there's zero point in keeping a government in the first place.

    3. Re: Yep, That's Anarchy by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      How in God's name is an IPO going to cause depression 2.0? If Goldman and the other Banks underwrite a junk business that's on them and I recall a few IPOs that went under the open price. No depression there.

      The original Great Depression had many factors, one of which was Goldman Sachs figuring out they could IPO shell corporations, get tons of investors, shift the money out to themselves, take huge loans, then pull the plug. Eventually this giant pyramid of investments did the dot-com bust thing on a much larger scale.

      The 2008 Depression was a result of "financial innovation" by banks playing games to get around the financial industry safeguards. By the law of averages, if you pile thousands of loans together and a few dozen are bad, your package is overall profitable. This stops working when an abnormal situation occurs, such as when people start losing jobs, folks start pulling back, ARM loans adjust out of people's reach, and suddenly NOBODY can pay their NINJA (no income, no job, no assets) loans.

      The bigger problem will be the loss of jobs from the loss of liquidity around these government employees who are no longer spending.

    4. Re:Yep, That's Anarchy by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      The FDA isn't inspecting food right now. If this keeps up sooner or later we're gonna have an outbreak.

      How would we tell the difference? There's so many outbreaks now, especially with lettuce, that the FDA is performing recalls rather than catching things before they reach the consumer.

    5. Re:Yep, That's Anarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FDA isn't inspecting food right now. If this keeps up sooner or later we're gonna have an outbreak. If you have small children they're going to die. Same if you're elderly.

      Of course the FDA isn't expecting food right now - it's not the agency that inspects food - it's the USDA. And by the way, the USDA is funded and operating.

      Go do some homework on your other FUD claims as well.

    6. Re:Yep, That's Anarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you are suggesting we artificially create a profit motive to keeping government open, by enforcing short-term losses rather than allowing short-term gains, when the government shuts down, in order to avoid potentially more serious long-term losses?

      Honest question: are studies done to assess the impacts of individual regulations and agencies to see whether they are a long-term asset or liability? Considering everything the FDA has done, what is the likelihood we would have been better off never having it?

  20. Because everything is political by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this massively impacts our lives. If this keeps up the economy will tank. Then we're gonna start seeing mass layoffs to boost stock prices.

    Politics impact every aspect of your life. This is the "Stuff that matters" part of the tag line. There's a taboo on talking about them because our ruling class would like very much for you and me to leave all that icky government stuff up to them.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Because everything is political by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this massively impacts our lives. If this keeps up the economy will tank. Then we're gonna start seeing mass layoffs to boost stock prices

      This shutdown has almost no impact on our daily lives and will have no long term impact on anything.

      Democrats don't want give in because they will lose face, but eventually they will have to. Trump has them cornered.

    2. Re:Because everything is political by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      This shutdown has almost no impact on our daily lives and will have no long term impact on anything.

      That's a bet you're going to lose. Layoffs in the tens-of-thousands range have an effect on the overall economy. 800,000 effective layoffs is gonna be bad.

      Democrats don't want give in because they will lose face, but eventually they will have to

      Why? The public blames Trump. Trump's approval rating is dropping. Declaring that he "owns the shutdown" was a really bad political move. Also his "offer" to not deport the DACA kids after the courts forbade him from deporting the DACA kids isn't changing that dynamic.

      It turns out, the public does not like negotiating with people who take hostages.

      The House has passed multiple spending bills to end this. Pelosi explicitly chose the spending resolution that passed the Senate 93-6 in December, so "we don't like that bill" isn't gonna fly. The 2020 election features way more Republican Senators up for re-election than Democrats. Their inability to do the most basic part of their job is not going unnoticed. This situation needs to end soon for the Republicans, so that the public can "move on" and forget about it during those 2020 Senate elections.

      The incentives do not line up with a Democratic capitulation.

  21. Wall would not last by Pitawg · · Score: 1

    Multiple Russian female prostitutes, wearing Chinese knock-off Soviet-era flag panties, bleeding red dye into the urination stream, leaving a presidential orange glow starting on the head, then collected as it drips from his toes, and distributed to the incel army, with a hearty "OH Yeah!!" as the wall goes bust!

    1. Re:Wall would not last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Multiple Russian female prostitutes, wearing Chinese knock-off Soviet-era flag panties, bleeding red dye into the urination stream

      LOL, I'll be in my bunk.

      Now, where do I sign up?

  22. Hopefully the major impact will be by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    generating a large list of people who should never be re-elected.

    Politics in the US should be about what is best for the country, not some personal/political grudges or egregious self interest/self promotion.

    If political parties have lost sight of that, voters should make their voices heard (loudly) If voters can't be bothered to fix this mess, they deserve their representation.

    1. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by bryanbrunton · · Score: 0

      Exactly, Trump should never be re-elected. And if the midterms results are played out in 2020, then most of the traitorous Republicans lapdogs in the Senate won't be re-elected.

      Presidents have never closed the government unless they get specific funding on a controversial (not publicly supported) budgetary item (the wall).

      The United States of America has never worked like that.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

    2. Re: Hopefully the major impact will be by houghi · · Score: 1

      That list of people is readily avalable when you vote.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

      To a certain extent I'll agree with you, but don't fail to recognize that a large fraction of the voting citizens in this country also need to stop making their electoral choices based on "sticking it to the Libtards".

    4. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A majority of American voters chose Trump’s opponent.

    5. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, you really swallowed the hook, didn't you?

    6. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by kenh · · Score: 1

      Exactly, Trump should never be re-elected. And if the midterms results are played out in 2020, then most of the traitorous Republicans lapdogs in the Senate won't be re-elected.

      A third of the Senate was up for re-election, and a number of Republicans opted to retire, rather than run for re-election, and STILL the Republicans picked up seats in the Senate - increased their majority.

      Are you thinking of the House, where everyone was up for re-election in 2018? The Senate was an unabashed success for the Republicans in 2018.

      --
      Ken
    7. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Politics in the U.S. should be about what is best for liberty, not some personal/political grudges or egregious self interest/self promotion.

      Fixed that for you. And before you pretend that liberty means people can do whatever they want and harm their their neighbor with no repercussion - go back and understand what liberty is: liberty means responsibility and accountability with equal division between citizens.

    8. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      A third of the Senate was up for re-election, and a number of Republicans opted to retire, rather than run for re-election, and STILL the Republicans picked up seats in the Senate - increased their majority.

      ...by 4. The forecast before the election was they would pick up 6. Those 4 were also much closer than predicted. It was quite far from "unabashed success".

      But the Democrats were defending a far larger number of seats in 2016 than the Republicans, so the Democrats lost some. Guess what happens in 2020? Republicans are defending far more seats than Democrats.

      Pelosi's passed a bill that passed the Senate 93-6, so "we don't like that bill" isn't going to fly. If it was good enough for 93 "yea" votes in December, it's good enough for at least 51 in January.

      You're following the "master negotiator" over a cliff. We are, unfortunately, strapped to you. But negotiating with hostage-takers is not a viable long-term solution, so "Geronimo!!"

    9. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's not a "large list"...just one name on it:

      Trump.

      Remember? He said he OWNS the shutdown COMPLETELY. That means he WANTS you to blame HIM and NOT anyone else. REMEMBER??

    10. Re:Hopefully the major impact will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creating a long list of government employees that shouldn't be re-hired. A long list of regulation that prevents companies from operating disbanded.

  23. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wow, so for 5 billion out of a 4 trillion dollar budget we can eliminate 2/3rds of illegal entries?

    Reading-comprehension fail. 2/3 is the number of illegal immigrants a wall would not stop. That said, 1/3 is nothing to scoff at and should still be a no-brainer.

  24. All government salaries combined by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    say we make it permanent and fire all furloughed workers. We might actually be able to balance the budge,

    All government salaries combined account for around $200 billion. We could literally fire every single federal employee and we still wouldn't have even covered half the federal deficit ($779 billion last year).

    Who's with me on this....

    Nobody with a brain in their skull.

    1. Re:All government salaries combined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      say we make it permanent and fire all furloughed workers. We might actually be able to balance the budge,

      All government salaries combined account for around $200 billion. We could literally fire every single federal employee and we still wouldn't have even covered half the federal deficit ($779 billion last year).

      Who's with me on this....

      Nobody with a brain in their skull.

      The retard is demanding that all of the people now working without pay be dismissed? Or is the the new Republican plan to re-institute slavery?

    2. Re:All government salaries combined by cordovaCon83 · · Score: 1

      Ah, now we arrive at the heart of the Republican agenda...

    3. Re:All government salaries combined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fire half and cut half of all their free giveaways.

    4. Re:All government salaries combined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't American. You have said it before. Why do you constantly post on American stories as if you speak for all 330 million people you are not a member of?

  25. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, I apologize for being a bit slow, but how exactly will a wall eliminate these 2/3 of illegal immigrants that enter through through the normal ports of entry?

    Are you suggesting that the intent of the wall is to shut down existing ports of entry?

  26. Why do Republicans hate US citizens? by sjbe · · Score: 0

    Why is keeping illegal border crossings open more important to Democrats than American's jobs? Really makes you wonder...

    Because this idiotic wall would do nothing to prevent them. It's a wasteful and hateful bit of bigotry and xenophobia. Ironic too in a country filled almost entirely with immigrants and their decendants. If Trump and the republicans gave a shit about US jobs he would and should cave on this immediately but he's willing to burn down the house to build a monument to his racism.

  27. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Votes... and that eventually means government takeover and total control if and when they have the Presidency, House of Representatives majority, and Senate majority.

    They are not just against the US/Mexico border wall...

    Against voter ID... no, it's not "minority suppression", but voter ID including citizenship verification before issuing such a voter ID blocks any illegal alien or non-citizen even with legal documentation from casting an illegal vote. They can't even illegally register to vote, although online registration plus any online "interview" session for citizenship verification is a loophole in absolute citizens-only voting.

    The excuse that illegals do work other American citizens won't do... well, then pay the prevailing wage for the expected work, don't go import (e.g., trafficking) and hire illegals to underpay them.

    The excuse that when they work, they pay taxes and contribute to the American economy... using someone else's stolen identity information? (More to the point, do they show a photocopy of documentation for I9 verification instead of document originals?)

    Repeat illegal border crossers arrested after a robbery, rape, or even murder. Not to mention use of force against the US Border Patrol. Liberals, especially the media, want to reduce it to a statistical numbers game. Especially that should be walled off so it doesn't happen at all. Zero tolerance.

    Illegal aliens crossing the border are not just Mexicans. They have found illegal Chinese being trafficked across the border. The caravans are Central Americans.

    Democrats stand for a Pure Democracy. Not a Republic. Article IV Section 4 requires a Republican form of Government guaranteed to the States, protection against Invasion and Domestic Violence. Articles I, II, and III define how the Republic will be run at the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches. Amendments exists, but the Article V amendment process means the US Constitution is not "a living document" but one that is resistant to rapid changes without a super-majority. Democrats fundamentally want to do away with the Electoral College among other causes (and it's been argued that doing so gives a few large states a super-majority over the entire election), and that makes them against the US Constitution (Article II Section 1, Amendment XII, Amendment XXIII). They also abhor freedom of choice, and when given sufficient attention and votes to their cause often ban, tax, or socially shame freedom of choice.

    Read their platform that is written more sensibly than they practice their politics, but that's why the Democrats are starting to lean further left to Democratic Socialism, not just a Pure Democracy. The United States of America can have its diversity and inclusion without making the minority populations of society overthrow the majority will of the people. It starts at the university levels when Liberal/Democrats preach their causes as part of "a well-rounded general education", then the inevitable protests that block the streets including marches without a permit, violence bordering on riots, actual riots resulting in vandalism, fires, and ultimately property destruction. They even did that for 10 days when Donald J. Trump won the presidency, shortly after Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton told them to always fight for what they believed in as part of her concession of defeat speech. Democrats ultimately want a new global world order, but then whose foreign country values ultimately prevail? Nothing in the US Constitution mandates a two party system. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have A Dream" speech was about unity, not anyone's supremacy. Something to consider... strongly consider... do we really need The Democratic Party as it exists today?

  28. I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Airport Security? 9/11 2.0

    Any time the run tests on what security screeners actually catch, it's something like an 70% failure rate - for things like guns. It is laughable to claim they are the reason we've not had more serious incidents.

    A this point airline passengers are savvy enough there's never going to be a 9/11 2.0, even if you simply abolished the TSA...

    You could easily replace that whole meaningless machinery with randomly placed undercover armed security on planes (the airlines could handle that, or government security when that was open) along with some light profiling in airport terminals.

    The FDA isn't inspecting food right now

    Gees dude can you not even read the WHOLE SUMMARY? They are for high risk products. But do you really think the food industry is not doing its own inspections as well?

    Folks really, really underestimate how important and beneficial the government is.

    With it shut down over a month now it seems we really, really don't.

    There are some areas where it is useful but we could pair back a LOT of government and make people's lives better all around.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I'm not worried about TSA -- the real security measures are things like reinforced flight deck doors + 2-person rule, non-cooperation with hijackers, etc. None of those are controlled by TSA. If you're worried about bombs, you can have airport police sweep a line with explosive-sniffing dogs and hand-search any luggage that they alert on.

      I'm worried about air traffic control. Stressful as hell job that's made more stressful by worries about money, and consequences of failure can be a disaster.

    2. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could easily replace that whole meaningless machinery with randomly placed undercover armed security on planes

      Nope. Your armed security could deal with traditional hijackers, who want to go to Cuba or collect ransom for letting the passengers off alive. They can also deal with 9/11 type hijackers who want to hit major landmarks with the plane.

      Armed security on board can't to anything about a suicide bomber who boards undetected and stay silent until he goes bang. True terrorism, instilling fear of flying without achieving anything else. Of course, his comrades on the ground can deliver his message for him.

    3. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      An explosive-sniffing dog can detect a suicide bomber. Of course, this assumes that the bomber wants to bother with an aircraft vs just targeting the security lines themselves.

    4. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Armed security on board can't to anything about a suicide bomber who boards undetected

      That is why you have profiling in airports. But long before the TSA was every around, airplane bombings were very rare, and usually involved luggage... you can still screen luggage for explosives, and you certainly do not need the government to do it.

      But also you are wrong, because remember the shoe bomber was stopped when he tried to set off his shoe bomb and passengers detained him...

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gees dude can you not even read the WHOLE SUMMARY? They are for high risk products. But do you really think the food industry is not doing its own inspections as well?

      Like Peanut Corporation of America?

      They were running operations without FDA oversight. 700+ people were made ill, 9 people dead. Later investigation found mold, cockroaches and filthy equipment in the processing facilities along with evidence that the company's tests found salmonella over a dozen times in 2007 to 2008 and they knowingly shipped the products anyway.

      So let me be the first to offer up a big "go fuck yourself" to your suggestion that companies will police themselves.

    6. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by kenh · · Score: 1

      Can an explosive-sniffing dog detect a ceramic knife, or even a box cutter?

      --
      Ken
    7. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Can an explosive-sniffing dog detect a ceramic knife, or even a box cutter?

      No jetliner will ever be forced to do anything ever again with just a sharp implement. They should let all knives through. They're irrelevant to air safety. Shit, the boxcutter thing failed on the day of the attack that started all the bullshit. The passengers of Flight 93 fought back and succeeded in preventing their plane being used as a missile. Now with reinforced cockpit doors, passengers fighting back in that circumstance will nearly all survive, since the plane won't be crashed during the fight.

      Knives on planes are fine. Even steel ones.

    8. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Also, many flights serve food with ceramic or glass tableware and sharp metal forks in first-class. Banning knives is frankly a bunch of nonsense considering TSA doesn't even ban glassware in carry-on luggage.

    9. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The market put them out of business so a big Fuck You right back at your statist notion that only the state can protect you - plenty of examples of food related sickness and death under FDA oversight too.

      You'll not be satisfied I see until every human is under the jack-boot of the state.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    10. Re:I call bullshit on 911 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'll ping pong that FUCK YOU right back to you. Going out of business didn't ressurect the dead. Inspecting and preventing the disease in the first place very well could have.

      FUCK
      YOU
      AND
      YOUR
      LIBERTARIAN
      BULLSHIT

  29. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Why is keeping illegal border crossings open more important to Democrats than American's jobs? Really makes you wonder..."

    Why wasnt it important to the Repubs BEFORE Dems took the house?

    You guys had the sandbox all to yourself for 2 solid years, why didnt you build you little wall then?

  30. The IRS by PPH · · Score: 1

    Called in to work the current tax season. Without pay.

    If there's anyone who should be comfortable with working, opening their pay envelope and finding nothing, it's the IRS. Welcome to the club.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  31. It's not by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    and you know it's not. There's no shortage of articles showing the wall is bullshit, that it was a memory trick to get Trump to remember to bang on about immigration, that walls can be tunneled under, climbed over and in the case of "beautify steel slats" cut open with a saw. You know all this. You're trolling.

    Thing is, the GOP is trolling all of us. The timing of this shut down was just before the Democrats took over the House. They did this to damage the Democratic party. They're ready to risk the entire US Economy for a political stunt. We should all be mortified, but somehow 40% still think this is a good idea.

    What have you got to lose? When the economy weakens your CEO is going to want his stock price to go back up (he takes a pay cut when it dips). That means stock buy backs. That means he needs cash. He's going to lay your ass off. If you're like most /.ers your in your 40s. Good luck finding a job after a layoff like that. The jobs will go to H1-Bs and Millennials. You'll end up in a shit job working graveyard 12s 4 days a week for enough money to pay your mortgage. That's what you've got to lose.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  32. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  33. Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Meanwhile, in civilised countries, if a budget approval isn't given, the previous authorised budget is automatically continued until such time as a new budget is approved.

    Nobody goes unpaid.
    Government doesn't get shutdown.
    Nobody has to implement emergency measures.
    Everything carries on as it did before until someone can get changes approved and sign off on the new budget.
    At no point does anything go any more unfunded/underfunded than it already was before the new budget was proposed.

    It's almost like those other countries spotted what a stupid idea "shut down the government", including using it as blackmail, was many, many, many centuries ago and worked around it.

    1. Re:Sigh. by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Yeah I'm thinking we need a law like this on the books, they didn't pass the stupid wall budget when the R's had the whole legislature, I don't see why they should hold things up for it now.

    2. Re:Sigh. by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      If you think this is bad, go back and read about the last government shutdown, which was a fight over raising the government's debt limit.

      Yes, that's right, the US government can pass legislation and budgets, but then has to vote again some time later on whether or not to actually pay the bills.

    3. Re:Sigh. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meanwhile, in civilised countries, if a budget approval isn't given, the previous authorised budget is automatically continued until such time as a new budget is approved.

      In may countries (particularly those with parliaments) a failure to pass a budget is considered a vote of non-confidence, and it triggers an election. And yes, the government continues to operate with the old budget until a new one is passed, perhaps by a newly-elected government.

      And votes of non-confidence are not restricted to budgets. They can be about almost anything important (like Brexit -- see UK current events). In short, the government can fall at any time, and an election ensues.

      If only the USA worked like that.

      On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does. -- Will Rogers

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    4. Re:Sigh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Used to be the case in the US, then in the 1980s Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti said 'nah you gotta close up and stop paying people'.

    5. Re:Sigh. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Swapping one set of problems for another is a favorite human activity. It does not reduce problems, but for a while, people feel like they have accomplished something. Having this rule in a polarized country of hours would lead to plenty events like no-confidence which would increase government instability.

      Our lawmakers use filibuster, imagine what would they do with budget votes every time executive and legislative branches are controlled by different parties?

      The root of the problem is not a particular set of rules. The root of the problem is that there is nothing that unites people, there is no common or prevalent ideology of any kind. People are not killing each other _en masse_ in United States only because the country is filthy rich.

      "Europe has a different set of rules" Did it help much during recent calamity (refugee crisis)?

      Haven't you forgotten Italy from 20-30 years ago?

      The only commonality in US is greed. Democrats represent the greed of people who have less, Reps represent the greed of people who have more.

      That's all there is to it. Technological progress destroyed ideology, and only pseudo-ideology ("liberal" ideology) is left.

      The only ideology left in the world is Islam.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    6. Re:Sigh. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, in civilised countries, if a budget approval isn't given, the previous authorised budget is automatically continued until such time as a new budget is approved.

      Nobody goes unpaid.
      Government doesn't get shutdown.
      Nobody has to implement emergency measures.
      Everything carries on as it did before until someone can get changes approved and sign off on the new budget.
      At no point does anything go any more unfunded/underfunded than it already was before the new budget was proposed.

      It's almost like those other countries spotted what a stupid idea "shut down the government", including using it as blackmail, was many, many, many centuries ago and worked around it.

      Not quite, under the Westminster system as used in Australia, Canada and the UK, if a budget is not approved the government get two weeks to resubmit a budget and if it is not approved the second time a general election (federal election in the US) is called. During an election period the government goes into caretaker mode where services get their budget to operate, but non-operational spending is suspended until the government is re-established and a new budget can be passed.

      Basically instead of shutting down, we go to an election.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  34. track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Going nicely according to Putin's orders.

  35. "ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Israel's wall has been fairly effective:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#Effectiveness

    No barrier is perfectly effective. People break out of prisons on occasion - that doesn't discount the utility of prisons in general.

    Using "perfection" as an excuse to leave our border unprotected is just stupid. Most people that are anti-wall should just admit they are open borders activists. No amount of border security will make them happy.

    1. Re:"ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This argument always makes me chuckle. Yes, let's make America as peaceful as the middle-east by duplicating the stupid decisions they make over there.

      Once upon a time, the US allowed unlimited immigration, and the country prospered.

      "Us" and "Them" are political constructs designed to divide and conquer.

      I would never choose to reside in the apartheid hell that Israel has become, and if that abomination becomes a reality in the US, I will be leaving.

    2. Re:"ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once upon a time, the US allowed unlimited immigration, and the country prospered.

      But during that time, the US did not have a bunch of entitlement programs handing out free food, free healthcare, etc to those immigrants. Instead, those immigrants came with the hopes and dreams of building businesses and doing actual productive work rather than drawing down the gov't coffers.

      Today, the US government is 21 trillion dollars in debt. Unless you want to abolish the entitlement programs, building the wall makes sense.

    3. Re:"ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm plenty okay with ending federal entitlement programs. Alms-giving always succeeded as a community-level endeavor. (AKA "a thousand points of light")

      So, yeah...let's fix entitlements. Just don't ask me for funding for your stupid wall.

      OBTW, you are still trying to brand "them" as being out to cheat "us". I wonder why that is? Have you personal knowledge that none of them could possibly contribute to our mutual well-being?

      You threaten to withhold entitlements and bid me build a wall.

      "Satan will threaten you with poverty and bid you to the shameful."

    4. Re: "ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But during that time, the US did not have a bunch of entitlement programs handing out free food, free healthcare, etc to those immigrants. Instead, those immigrants came with the hopes and dreams of building businesses and doing actual productive work rather than drawing down the gov't coffers.

      And yet those immigrants were hated and despised, denigrated and demonized unless they were appropriately white, and they were condemned for their laziness and poverty.

      Sorry.

      Today, the US government is 21 trillion dollars in debt. Unless you want to abolish the entitlement programs, building the wall makes sense.

      Lol, except the US isn't in debt because of welfare spending. Warmongering and Wall Street are the burdens.

      Another Wall won't help.

    5. Re:"ineffectual" wall by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Once upon a time, the US did not have a welfare state, and the country prospered. If we're going to roll back the clock, let's roll it back on everything.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    6. Re:"ineffectual" wall by bryanbrunton · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, actually before the US welfare state (that is Social Security and Food Stamps), the elderly starved and died, as did the poor.

      But Trump Traitors like you don't know your history. Shut up with your right wing bullshit.

    7. Re:"ineffectual" wall by LordKronos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No barrier is perfectly effective. People break out of prisons on occasion - that doesn't discount the utility of prisons in general.

      Seriously? You are comparing a wall that spans over 1000 miles and where the response time is measured in hours with a prison wall where 1 person can see from one side to the other, and that has guards with machine guns every couple hundred feet ready to open fire the second someone begins climbing?

      As I've said previously on this topic, physical barriers only work when the delay they add is proportional to the response time, or when the barrier improves the response time. Out in the desert, even if you know the exact moment that someone breaches the border, the response time can be hours. Adding 5 or 10 minutes for someone to scale the wall is trivial. If you can track down and intercept someone who breached the border 1 hour 50 minutes ago, you can almost surely track down someone who breached the border 2 hours ago.

    8. Re: "ineffectual" wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now they get raped and murdered by illegal aliens.

      Your world is so much better!!! Yes, lets fatten up the old and the poor so the illegals have someone worth preying on who cant fight back or hide behind their gated (thatâ(TM)s a wall to you) communities.

      So intellectually dishonest to say walls donâ(TM)t work. TDS.

  36. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

    1. Re:Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know there isn't really such a thing as a welfare check anymore, right? You could argue that is what TANF is, but you have to be essentially homeless and it isn't enough money to pay for anything. You are scared of a boogyman that just doesn't exist.

  37. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

    The legislation to open the government has already been passed by the Democrats.

    The racist, sexist, senile bastard in the oval office threatened to veto the legislation. So his Republican lap dogs in the Senate just sit on their hands.

    Presidents don't close the government unless they get specific funding on a controversial (not publicly supported) budgetary item (the wall). The United States of America has never worked like that.

    Only in the traitorous despotic Trumpocracy would idiots expect government to work like that.

  38. Slush fund by cordovaCon83 · · Score: 1

    Clearly this wall money is to be nothing but a huge slush fund.

  39. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    Where are you getting this $44trillion number from? US GDP is half that.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_federal_budget

    Trump isn't even asking for anything like that. Check the budget docs yourself. Page 121. Unless you've somehow taken the budget numbers for 2019-2028 and mixed them up into one thing

    https://www.govinfo.gov/conten...

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  40. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump shut down a lot of the government - holding it and those who need it hostage - for the IDEA of a wall, not current policies or programs, an IDEA.

    What would we call that behaviour, normally?

    And why would we NOT 'negotiate'?

  41. Laughably inaccurate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You use the same trick that state governments use when talking about public employee salaries - you talk about the current annual cost of salaries while ignoring long-term unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities.

    The current estimates for unfunded federal pension liabilities are about $3.5 trillion.

    Cutting the enormous federal bureaucracy makes a small short-term beneficial impact and a very large long-term beneficial impact. Cutting the federal government back to it's constitutionally defined responsibilities will go a long way to restoring sanity to our nation's finances.

    If you want to see what a nation's finances looks like with too many people working for government - look at Greece. We are heading towards disaster if we don't do something about it now.

    Due to the uncontrolled growth of state and federal governments, we have made long-term financial promises that can never be fulfilled. These liabilities will rob our children and grandchildren of their futures.

    1. Re: Laughably inaccurate by buswolley · · Score: 0

      Idiot.
      Go learn something about what fiat currency means, something the Greeks did not have.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  42. how long until.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep wondering how long before the government workers just get new jobs so that even after the shutdown is over the government will still be crippled because they can't get the people back.

  43. American shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The partial government shutdown..."

    Please qualify this, we don't all live in the US.

    1. Re:American shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The partial government shutdown..."

      Please qualify this, we don't all live in the US.

      It means that the approximately 17% of federal government employees deemed "non-essential" are currently on leave without pay. Many of the slightly more essential of the "non-essential" workers are currently expected to work without receiving a paycheck until the partial government shutdown is over, at which point all of the furloughed employees will be receiving all of their back pay.

  44. Re: Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by buswolley · · Score: 1

    Why not pass the bill that is already on his desk? Trump is a terrorist.

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  45. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  46. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fruit and vegetables. The answer is always fruit and vegetables.

  47. The cost of opening the government is $0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. The cost of opening the government is $0.

    It is like asking middle Americans to pony up money they don't have for a ineffective solution nobody wants, after they were told they wouldn't have to burden the cost in the first place, all so a weak president can fulfill a poorly thought out campaign "promise" he never intended to keep in the first place, because he was just telling everyone what they wanted to hear, so he could win the election and satisfy his ego..

    I say DON'T write the $57 dollar check, so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car. These are the same families that have already have kids on school lunch assistance programs.

    In the meantime, Trump allowed himself to get totally bitch slapped by Ann Coulter. So after getting pushed around by a girl, now he's gotta try to pretend he isn't a little weakling, so he refused to sign. This was Trump's decision and Trump's alone. Everybody knows it. It shows in the polls.

  48. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  49. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  50. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  51. JEW SOCIAL ENGINEERING vs. GOYIM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

    Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.

    This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):

    Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

    2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

    4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

    5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

    7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

    8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

    9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

    10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

    11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

    12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

    13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

    14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

    16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

    17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

    18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

    19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

    20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

    21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen H

  52. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  53. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  54. You should read your own citations sometime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Israel's wall has been fairly effective:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#Effectiveness

    No barrier is perfectly effective. People break out of prisons on occasion - that doesn't discount the utility of prisons in general.

    Using "perfection" as an excuse to leave our border unprotected is just stupid. Most people that are anti-wall should just admit they are open borders activists. No amount of border security will make them happy.

    from the article you cited:

    Haaretz reported, "[t]he security fence is no longer mentioned as the major factor in preventing suicide bombings, mainly because the terrorists have found ways to bypass it."[56] Former Israeli Secretary of Defence Moshe Arens says that the reduction in Palestinian violence is largely due to the IDF's entry into the West Bank in 2002.[57]

    Maybe people who are for the wall should admit they haven't studied the issue and attribute false motivations to those who have?

    1. Re:You should read your own citations sometime by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      The point of the wall is to force the people you're trying to block to find other ways. Those ways will be less convenient, which will reduce the number of people to block. Maybe the people against a wall should admit that they have not clue what universe they're living in.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    2. Re:You should read your own citations sometime by skam240 · · Score: 2

      Right, the requirement of the use of a ladder will be a huge deterrent, well worth the 10's of billions of dollars it will cost in the end.

      Good luck convincing anyone who hasn't already decided the wall must be built with that.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    3. Re:You should read your own citations sometime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the Wikipedia article:
      About 90–95% of the barrier will be constructed as a "multi-layered fence system"[27] with the IDF's preferred design having three fences, pyramid-shaped stacks of barbed wire on the two outer fences, a lighter-weight fence with intrusion detection equipment in the middle, an anti-vehicle ditch, patrol roads on both sides, and a smooth strip of sand for "intrusion tracking".[28]

      Does this sound like a 30' tall concrete and steel slat wall?

      Estimated cost to build 350km (217miles) of the fence in 2003 was $220 million. Adjusting for inflation, that would be $304 million now.

    4. Re:You should read your own citations sometime by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Ever had to carry a 20 ft ladder over rough terrain? Border security requested a fence instead of a wall. The main reason for that was so that they could see the people carrying the 20 ft ladder over rough terrain, and could concentrate their efforts there.

      Also, one ladder wouldn't help, unless they're willing to toss their young children off a 20 ft wall. I wouln't necessarily put that past them. They are willing to drag them across a desert, after all. They'll need to carry two ladders over rough terrain.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re:You should read your own citations sometime by skam240 · · Score: 1

      "Ever had to carry a 20 ft ladder over rough terrain?"

      No but I would imagine several people could do it quite easily.

      "Border security requested a fence instead of a wall. The main reason for that was so that they could see the people carrying the 20 ft ladder over rough terrain, and could concentrate their efforts there."

      You know what would be even easier to see a bunch of illegal immigrants through? Nothing. Meanwhile I wall doesn't mean more security guarding it so how will a wall help us see people coming over the boarder illegally?

      "They are willing to drag them across a desert, after all. They'll need to carry two ladders over rough terrain."

      More like a ladder and a rope. Or they can become mules and use one of the many tunnels currently running under our boarder. We find more every year and that's without Trump's wall.

      Illegal immigrants will continue to enter our country as long as there is demand for their labor. Simple supply and demand economics are a powerful force that a stupid wall will not thwart. Meanwhile, things like required use of our government's already existing e-verify system by employers aren't even being discussed by mainstream Republicans despite that reducing demand for illegal immigrant labor will significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants entering the country as the only reason the vast majority of them come here is for work.

      But no, the Republican party elites don't actually want to solve the problem, that would upset big Ag which is the only money in most of their states. So rather than making a huge dent in the incredibly simple supply and demand problem for a cost of next to nothing they're willing to blow billions on a huge symbol that won't do shit.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  55. Record holding President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A shutdown falls on the President’s lack of leadership. He can’t even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak."

    Trump is officially the weakest President in the history of the US.

  56. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  57. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  58. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you suggesting the Dems want to do something about visa overstays instead of a wall?

  59. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    When has this ever impressed financial institutes?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  60. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  61. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump derangement syndrome. Their hatred for him runs so deep that they're willing to do a complete 180 on border security just to stick it to him, the rest of us be damned.

    If this was about border security then why didn’t the former governer of Texas, and US President for eight years ask for it?
    Shit, the last two republican presidents were from Texas, the first Bush doubled down on the War on Drugs. Where was the stop everything and cut a check for all the wall I want back then? Clearly it wasn’t an emergency, and there’s nothing factual suggesting it is now. It’s plainly obvious that both parties are completely happy dolling out chunks of money for border security. The whole full wall funding now or else silver bullet bull shit isn’t fooling anyone but trumpkins.

  62. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  63. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    The dems are about to save you a shitload of money, by not allowing a goofball with delusions of grandeur to blow it on something that won't ever stop a single illegal immigrant.

    That amount of money would be more than sufficient to actually DO something against illegal immigration. But since when did the Reps ever want to do that? Cheap labor that can't organize isn't easy to find inside the US, ya know...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  64. Okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better build the wall then. I don't care how long we have to keep shut down. There is a law on the books from the Obama days that said the wall "shall be built" and they didn't do it. This isn't optional.

  65. SCHUMER JEWS HATE GOYIM/GENTILES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

    Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.

    This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):

    Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

    2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

    4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

    5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

    7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

    8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

    9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

    10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

    11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

    12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

    13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

    14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

    16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

    17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

    18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

    19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

    20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

    21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen H

  66. Re: SCHUMER JEWS HATE GOYIM/GENTILES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big if true.

  67. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I heard this it was "almost half", now it's two thirds.

    Those checkpoints have become very popular in just a few days.

  68. No Beer - free or otherwise by ripvlan · · Score: 2

    A local beer company says they may not be able to make "new" summer beers. The labels must be inspected and approved by the government (yes -- the labels, on the can). Their plan is to bring back last years summer beer because those labels are approved. There is a deadline for them to meet the summer demand - but with an expected backlog they still aren't sure they can make it.

    Imagine - government killing innovation.

    I hope they haven't started making that beer yet. It would be a money loser if it was already in the pipeline. sure they could come out with it later - but who wants to buy a Summer Ale during October Fest?

    The shutdown is having a wide impact across several industries.

    1. Re:No Beer - free or otherwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please. Beer recipes are not innovation. Most of those "seasonal special" beers are the same exact grain bill every year, the only thing that's changed is the packaging and the label.

      "50% of beer's flavor comes from marketing."

    2. Re:No Beer - free or otherwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell the beer in cans with no labels. Then no approvals are required. Have someone write "Shutdown Beer" on the side of the naked cans in magic marker.

      Case closed.

    3. Re:No Beer - free or otherwise by dargaud · · Score: 1

      So ? They should make it anyway: if they aren't being inspected because of the shutdown, they can't be fined because... of the shutdown.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    4. Re:No Beer - free or otherwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a reason to end the stupid process of government having to approve beer labels.

      Sure you can have them fine or punish companies that produce inaccurate labels.

      Funny how there isn't funding for the bureaucracy, but still have funding for punishing you for not going through the asinine bureaucracy.

    5. Re:No Beer - free or otherwise by ripvlan · · Score: 1

      I appreciate the sentiment. And I agree. If it was really important the govt would be open.

      However, some gov't higher-up did point out that there is a statue of limitation and the govt won't be closed for that long.

      Although that last point remains to be seen. :-P

  69. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by bryanbrunton · · Score: 1

    After the Republicans are slapped in the face again in 2020 (just like in the 2018 midterms), you racist morons will realize that you need to find politicians who at least pretend to not be racist, sexist bastards.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

  70. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I could have one wish come true this Christmas, it's that you would have a bout of food poisoning brought about by a lack of food safety inspections while in a long queue at an airport caused by a lack of TSA staff. You wouldn't learn the error of your ways, but the suffering would be reasonable poetic justice.

  71. If I wanted to Nuke the US by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now would be a good time :(

    --
    [($)]
  72. JEWS LIKE SCHUMER RUN THEM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

    Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.

    This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):

    Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

    2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

    4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

    5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

    7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

    8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

    9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

    10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

    11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

    12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

    13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

    14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

    16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

    17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

    18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

    19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

    20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

    21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen H

  73. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is like the parent who insists on getting a giant SUV to drive around their family with because it's "safer", when in reality the minivan is twice as safe and half the price, plus is better for carrying cargo and gets better fuel economy. That parent doesn't really care about what makes their family safer, they just care about what makes them feel good. And a giant steel box covered in leather makes them feel good, regardless of how likely it is to kill a member of their family.

    Trump wants a wall to make the sort of people who are afraid of Mexicans *feel* safer, even though the money is better spent on things that will actually *make* them safer.

    Why is the wall a waste of money? First of all is the fiction that Mexicans apparently don't know how to use shovels or ropes. The wall isn't going to stop somebody who really wants to come in. Second is the fiction that Mexicans are criminals or disease carriers. Mexican immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than non-immigrants and don't have diseases that Americans don't already have. Third is the fiction that it's just a few billion dollars. Maybe it's a few billion dollars to build one small section of the wall, but it will take an order of magnitude more money to build the complete wall, and you have to spend money every day for maintenance and monitoring. If you don't have a guard tower every 1000 feet, you may as well not have a wall.

    dom

  74. Slashdot antispam is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot could fix this copy paste bullshit by adding a simple delay before accepting the next character in input. Even a two millisecond delay per character would allow 100wpm typists unfettered access.

    1. Re:Slashdot antispam is a joke by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      That's not possible without active code on the input page, which makes it slow and breaks it if browsers disable active code execution for security.

    2. Re:Slashdot antispam is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd you fear that so much. Must be truth\fact seeing you keep downmoderating it and you can't valid prove it wrong.

    3. Re:Slashdot antispam is a joke by Cederic · · Score: 1

      No, it gets modded down because it's off topic hatred being spewed by an imbecile.

      Nobody is trying to disprove it because we just ignore the idiocy and move on to other posts relevant to the article.

    4. Re:Slashdot antispam is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You prove nothing in it incorrect about Jews. Schumer's a jew and jews are RACIST. Save your jedi mindtricks for snowflake millenials indoctrined by your brainwashing lies!

    5. Re:Slashdot antispam is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You prove nothing in it incorrect about Jews. Schumer's a jew and jews are RACIST. Save your jedi mindtricks for snowflake millenials indoctrined by your brainwashing lies!

      Emphasis mine. If there was a sane god, that post would have put existence out of its misery by virtue of not suffering such paradoxical thought to bedevil the rest of us.

      Your snowflake millenial barb would have a chance of sticking if you weren't the freaks who flipped out over Dungeons and Dragons and Janet Jackson's pastied boob.

  75. Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by SkOink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Congress can end this shutdown without the president's support or approval. They can pass a budget bill, and send it to the president. If he vetoes it, they can vote to override the veto.

    I don't understand why more people aren't holding Congress to task on this. They literally don't need the president's buy-in at all to get a budget passed.

    --
    ---- I'll take you in a Hunt deathmatch any day.
    1. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 5, Informative

      The House of Representatives already passed a budget (which included something like $1.5 billion for border security) on their first day of the year. The Senate hasn't voted on it because Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, has refused to call for a vote on any budget that would be vetoed.

    2. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      It should be noted that the bill passed by the House in January passed the Senate 93-6 in December. Pelosi chose it because it passed the Senate by a massive majority already.

      (The bill passed the house in December, went to the Senate where it was amended and passed 93-6 and Trump said he'd sign it. It needed to go back to the House because of the amendments, but Trump "changed his mind" and Paul Ryan had one last "fuck you" to deliver to the country and did not bring it up for a vote. Since there is a new Congress, the old vote in the Senate does not advance the bill.)

    3. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mitch McConnell is really the issue with most of these things, more sore than the orange moron. He was an obstructionist with Obama, he's an obstructionist with Pelosi.

    4. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't they just bypass him as well? That sounds so stupid to have one man be able to grind an entire branch into halt.

    5. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Isn't the President's power of veto overruled by a more-than two-thirds majority?

      ie he can only veto something that has a majority between 50% and 66.67%

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    6. Re:Why doesn't Congress just approve the budget? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mitch McConnell, one of the most powerful people in America, and by extension one of the most powerful people in the world.

      Mitch says, "What can I do? Why are you all looking at me? I'm just the piano player! Don't ask me to do my job, no God please!"

  76. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    The dems are about to save you a shitload of money, by not allowing a goofball with delusions of grandeur to blow it on something that won't ever stop a single illegal immigrant.

    Now, that's an exaggeration. It would probably stop a handful, at least. It wouldn't put any meaningful dent in the numbers, however.

    On the other hand, I don't think that the wall would ever actually get built. They'd say they're building the wall, and they'd maybe make a token effort, and then the money would disappear into the usual pockets and then you'd see the outstretched hand return — or you'd see Trump's back side retreat into the distance, but you wouldn't see a wall. It's much like how he goes golfing every weekend on the premise that it's necessary for him to reduce his stress level and govern effectively. Bollocks, of course; he has no intention of doing any such thing.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  77. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do you think that wall would stop the 1/3? It is far more plausible that they would just be delayed a bit while they figure out how to climb it. (Or pay an entrance fee for one of the tunnels under the wall). And all this only until the first Mexican scrap-metal dealer figures out how to mine this rich resource.

  78. Keep your doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Democrats certainly refuse to agree with him, they can rationally recognize him for the lying hyperbolic conartist he is.

    If you like your insurance or your doctor you can keep it.
    You will save $2500 a year on premiums.

    They can recognize a liar? No they can't, in fact they attack people who tell the truth, like everyone who said the ACA would RAISE premiums like it did.
    Remember, this is "We have to pass the bill to see what is in it" Pelosi.

    I would suggest you don't call other people liars if you support Democrats.

    1. Re: Keep your doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you like your insurance or your doctor you can keep it.

      The first was never promised, in fact, it was explicitly rejected since many so-called insurance plans were frauds. That said, you are allowed to deal with private insurers and in fact, at your insistence, there is no public option.

      The second was indeed fulfilled, the government did not take away choice of doctors. You are upset because some doctors quit? Because some insurance companies, of their own accord, changed their affiliations?

      Sorry, but Obama could not force doctors to work for you. He was merely talking about the idea of government assigned doctors which the ACA did not do.

      Some of us know context.

      You will save $2500 a year on premiums.

      Never promised either. Sorry, but we actually remember people being told they would have to start paying for insurance.

      That whole mandate you hated.

      They can recognize a liar? No they can't, in fact they attack people who tell the truth, like everyone who said the ACA would RAISE premiums like it did.

      Nope. Insurance companies did, and they often blamed all sorts of causes to excuse their own greed.

      They always have.

      Remember, this is "We have to pass the bill to see what is in it" Pelosi.

      I remember what she actually said, that she was explicitly complaining about the multitude of lies being told at the time about the PPACA. You deliberately lie and misrepresent it.

      I would suggest you don't call other people liars if you support Democrats.

      I would suggest you stop lying and oppose other liars on your own side if you want to be believed.

      But no, no, you apologize for the man who lied about being in the White house for weeks days immediately supposedly going to the border.

      You know, the one in office. Lying about his shutdown.

      Meanwhile you are still upset over the ACA, your own hotbed of lies to justify it. Me? I opposed it because it didn't do what it should have.
      Brought the abuses in American healthcare to the spotlight and put them on trial.

      I didn't like like you just did.

  79. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    So, essentially, it's like the Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere all over again.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  80. LOL! Does THAT matter? No & I pay for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL! Does THAT matter? No & I pay for it as a homeowner paying taxes to make my fellow man into a potato?? No way & obviously you see I don't USE THE WELFARE SYSTEM MYSELF - no way (demeaning & I KNOW what NOT doing this "Don't give me a fish: Give me a fishing pole & TEACH ME HOW TO FISH FOR MYSELF" does to men - ruins them).

    * Take away a man's incentive & DRIVE? GOOD women don't want them - assuming a woman's NOT a "Gold Digger", most chicks just want a guy that can HOLD THEIR OWN - not a potato living off welfare.

    (Gets a man to SHOOT HIMSELF IN THE FOOT before he can even start a race to the finish line in other words - just like HEROIN or other OPIATES do).

    APK

    P.S.=> Thanks for MAKING MY POINT for me... apk

    1. Re:LOL! Does THAT matter? No & I pay for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool cool. You know that most folks on welfare actually work right? I need to quit asking you these questions because it apparently doesn't matter. You can't even seem to read

  81. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  82. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  83. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  84. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  85. We don't negotiate with terrorists by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know that sounds harsh, so here's somebody way more articulate than I am to explain why the verbiage is appropriate.

    Trump & the GOP are testing us. This isn't about the wall, this about ruling by fiat by continuously threatening the security and stability of the United States. We can't let that stand. If we do we become a defacto dictatorship.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:We don't negotiate with terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about the wall.

    2. Re:We don't negotiate with terrorists by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I saw a good article in the BBC recently about the fundamental difference between a dictatorship and a democracy.

      A democracy focuses on the means to an end: the debate about how to achieve security, the voting on proposals, the process of government.
      A dictatorship focuses on the end: the wall.

    3. Re:We don't negotiate with terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't this just prove that it is complete idiocy to funnel power to the top? Doesn't this just prove that government should be minimal and weak instead of boundless? The trampling of the constitution by many many before him is what leaves us in this position.

  86. Citation needed by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Last I heard they'll deal if he puts DACA on the table for real (and not just a pinky promise not to deport them for 3 years which is what he just offered).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Citation needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DACA was originally just an executive order anyhow (Thanks Obama!), so this would be support to accept it as a proper bill, if the Democrats ever got around to writing it.

  87. FDA approvals by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    Is the FDA shut down? I wonder if this could delay the release & approval of any medical devices or drugs. Now THAT would be a spectacular failure. Imagine the headlines: "Shutdown over border wall funding prevents release of life-saving drug." Or the reverse: what if a device or drug is approved in a rush since they fall behind, and due diligence is not done, and the device/drug kills someone?

    1. Re:FDA approvals by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      It's far more fireball-ish than that. Aircraft are not being inspected.

  88. rsilvergun lies ONCE AGAIN. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When losing the debate, just make shit up I guess. It appears the left is losing the shutdown and starting to realize it.

    Pelosi said she will NOT discuss ANYTHING that includes money for the wall, not DACA not anything.
    I find it curious you are making up their point of view. Perhaps you are afraid that they are being so stupid you need to come and do damage control for them. To bad you have to lie to do so.

  89. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by kenh · · Score: 1

    First, it's not clear what it means for an "illegal border crossing" to be "kept open", but more importantly, the Democrats have already offered over a billion dollars to improve border security -- it's the $5.7B for a "wall" or "physical barrier" or "not a wall from sea to shining sea but merely a few improvements" that Trump's requesting that they're disagreeing with.

    So Democrats want money for improved detainment facilities, additional judges to address the backlog of cases, and improved technology to provide a "virtual wall" in many locations, along with additional border agents? Hold that thought.

    I'd also like to point out that while the scope of Trump's proposed border security "solution" keeps shrinking, the price tag does not. If he needed $5.7B to "build the wall!", then why isn't it considerably cheaper to implement his newly scaled down plan?

    First off, it was always a "scaled-down" solution - he never proposed a border-to-border wall fro $5.7BN, he wanted $25BN for a border-to-border wall, to be built over time - you know, the wall Democrats voted for in 2006.

    Second, he hasn't budged from $5.7BN because has the scope has been reduced, he's added money for improvements to detention facilities, additional judges to address the backlog, improved technology to monitor the border and additional border agents... But you knew that, right?

    --
    Ken
  90. Opportunity? by galabar · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is an opportunity to see where we can cut out some of the fat?

  91. Great Switcheroo by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    You just reminded me of this. TL;DR: the rich under fund the government, loan the gov't the money to operate and collect the interest on it. Then we pay the interest with our tax dollars.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  92. Because the Dems took the House by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    and the GOP figured they could pin the shutdown on them and tank their polls. It's a cheap political move that shows the GOP will throw America under a bus for their own political goals.

    It's also terrorism. I mean, what else do you call it when you're using fear (in this case fear of the economic impacts of a gov't shutdown) to achieve a political end?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: Because the Dems took the House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't even want a government by the people. Wake up!

    2. Re:Because the Dems took the House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "and the GOP figured they could pin the shutdown on them and tank their polls. It's a cheap political move that shows the GOP will throw America under a bus for their own political goals. "

      Lots of people are seeing it as BOTH parties being more than happy to shit all over the populace for their political purposes.

  93. The Wall - Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK: Has anyone here have, you know, actual facts about the proposed wall? (and no CNN and Fox news don't count.)

    Cost, Efficiency, maintenance, ways to defeat it, deploy it, etc?

    Well now you do.

    https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=808155

    This is a Masters Theseus by a graduate of the Naval Postgraduate School, Homeland Security. I cant speak for the Homeland Security part, but the Navy part is a bunch of VERY serious people. This is by far the best summation on everything Wall that I've found. The good, bad and ugly.

    Read this and then you can Flame with Authority :-)

  94. Each side has to propose what the other gives up by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    It's not a compromise if he gets everything he wants,

    I see you do not know how compromise works, unsurprising given who you back.

    The way it works is, Trump says - "OK, How about in exchange for the wall funding you also get all of these Dreamer extensions you would love?

    That is where, the Democrats, were they reasonable humans, would say something like "How about 3 billion more for border security, only some of which may be used for new fencing, and the Dreamer extension you mentioned".

    See how that works? Each side proposes what the other gives up, generally in smaller increments until the two sides meet in the middle. You know, like people have been doing since the dawn of time?

    But instead., you have Trump saying, "how about this comp..." and the Democrats screaming "NO NO NON ONON NEVER NO".

    That indeed is not compromise, but it's the Democrats refusing even to consider offers now... do you want a year long shutdown? Because that's how you get a year long shutdown.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  95. Re:Each side has to propose what the other gives u by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    That is where, the Democrats, were they reasonable humans, would say something like "How about 3 billion more for border security, only some of which may be used for new fencing, and the Dreamer extension you mentioned".
    See how that works?

    They already tried that. Then Trump said "am I going to get my wall?" and they said "no" and then he walked out. He claims he didn't slap his hands down on the table, they say he did. Did you forget all of this already, or just blink and miss it?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  96. Yes you did need a supermajority... by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    They didn't NEED a supermajority to pass a simple bill

    Yes they did

    From the article, on the vote to pass the original Republican plan just before the Democrats took over the house:

    That legislation doesnâ(TM)t have the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate

    I think I corrected you before, so doesn't that make you the dumbest person on the planet you cannot learn from corrections?

    Just the fact you didn't even know that sets you at a certain questionable base level of civic ignorance.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re: Yes you did need a supermajority... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but only 50+1 is required in the Senate.

      This is written in the Constitution.

      There is nothing about your fantasy fairy tale about a super majority for passing a budget bill.

      That is needed for some other functions like Amendments but that wasn't necessary.

      Sorry, but the fact is, the GOP didn't even want to do it. Now President Tantrum is demanding billions in cash to be put on his pocket and the Turtle is going along.

      But he can't get it. The House will not do it.

      Move on and actually do something for the country or just pay off the Cheeto yourself.

    2. Re:Yes you did need a supermajority... by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 0

      Go, go, Ken Doll. Ad hominum is all you've got. You and the rest of your lying kind.

    3. Re:Yes you did need a supermajority... by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      I think I corrected you before, so doesn't that make you the dumbest person on the planet you cannot learn from corrections?

      Here's a wonderful opportunity for you to learn. Spending bills can be passed via Reconciliation in the Senate. Where they only need a simple majority.

      Also, the continuing resolution that passed the Senate in December passed by 93-6. This is a lovely opportunity for you to learn that 93 is just a teeny-tiny bit larger than 60. (It needed to go back to the House for another vote because of Senate amendments. It was set to pass in the House when Ann Counter overruled Trump's approval of the bill, and Ryan refused to bring up the bill.)

  97. When did they try that by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    They already tried that.

    Nope. Link please as to what you think constitutes "trying".

    Remember that a compromise ALSO does not mean, that one party gets absolutely nothing.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:When did they try that by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Nope. Link please as to what you think constitutes "trying".

      Answer my question first, weasel.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:When did they try that by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      I remember the "slapping" that so incenses you, but that's all irrelevant now, which is why I didn't bother to answer something so blindingly stupid - I can see you have no links to offer, so I win. I'll not be reading anything further from you, since you are stuck in the past and cannot even understand what negotiation (or the lack thereof) is.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:When did they try that by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I remember the "slapping" that so incenses you,

      Nice try snowflake, but I'm not incensed by it. I included it as an aid to memory since you clearly didn't know where we were in the conversation.

      I can see you have no links to offer, so I win.

      You don't win, dude. We all lose.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:When did they try that by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 2
      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    5. Re:When did they try that by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Remember that a compromise ALSO does not mean, that one party gets absolutely nothing.

      He does get something. There's over a billion dollars for border security, on top of the money he got last year and still hasn't spent.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  98. Not about wall anymore by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    It's not about the wall. Giving in will just encourage him and similar political personalities to do it again.

    1. Re:Not about wall anymore by bobbied · · Score: 1

      That's not it, you don't like that he got elected and refuse to make deals with him like has been done for hundreds of years in this country. What's happened is partisanship has won and now both sides are deeply entrenched in their positions and we are at an impasse. Look though your history, compromise has been effectively used many times in the past, why not now?

      I as you, how do we get out of this? Both sides have legitimate power to do what they are doing and we have divided government. Both sides need to choose what they are going to do about this. If you think the shutdown (with more and more of the government to follow) is a good thing and you are unwilling to discuss bipartisan solutions, then that's what we will have.

      Just have no doubt that eventually, if Trump keeps up making his public offers at a deal and keeps being rebuffed, the tide will turn and things will not go well for your ideals come the election of 2020. Don't be foolish, this is about votes and acting like spoiled children and not coming to the table isn't going to play well with the electorate 20 months from now.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  99. SCHUMER the JEW in a NUTSHELL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

    Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.

    This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):

    Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

    2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

    4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

    5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

    7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

    8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

    9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

    10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

    11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

    12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

    13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

    14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

    16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

    17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

    18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

    19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

    20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

    21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen H

  100. PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? Turning men into "entitled potatos" in an UNSUSTAINABLE SYSTEM kills them & the nation!

    * Who's going to PAY for WELFARE when the middle class has been ERODED AWAY the by "investment class" (crooks) WHO HAVE TAX LOOPHOLES GALORE & bullshit "trickle-down" 'voodoo economics' FAIL there too WHEN NOBODY CAN PAY THE TAX FOR THE FUCKING WELFARE, moron!

    Worse than THAT perhaps, is the FACT when you TAKE AWAY A MAN'S HOPE for @ least the POTENTIAL of growth & "being the King" SO you can WIN "The QUEEN" (girl of your dreams, as marrying LESS takes ALL DRIVE OUT OF YOU, for sure... just like a FAT BITCH does, lol - no shit, been there/done that).

    AGAIN also to stress it: GOOD women do NOT want a "welfare potato" OR a heroin junkie ENTITLED loser "snowflakian being"!

    APK

    P.S.=> Your BULLSHIT & MOVING GOALPOSTS falls RIGHT THE FUCK APART - what are you going to TRY to VAINLY tell me next? "HEROIN ADDICTION IS GOOD" too?? LMAO - go away, dolt... apk

    1. Re:PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really *can't* read. Sad

    2. Re:PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "great comeback" (not, more like pure evasion since your moving goalpost shit got shot down) from you the typical slashdot pseudo intellectual.

    3. Re:PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Delusional fat incel virgin APK is off his meds again.

    4. Re:PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like the man knows what he's talking about and all you have is your namecalling very stale "meds" response. Very lame of you.

    5. Re:PROVE IT & again: DOES IT MATTER? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you expect? He can't WRITE either.

  101. Now. How many average Americans miss it? by Chas · · Score: 1

    Seriously.

    Show of hands here.

    How many people NOT doing IPOs and just going to their regular jobs every day, day in and day out miss the 800K non-essential employees of the government are not at work, but will be paid for doing nothing anyhow, once the shutdown is over?

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Now. How many average Americans miss it? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      The thing you fail to realize is these regulations did not appear out of nowhere. They were all put in place to stop some bad acts that were causing people to be harmed, up to and including death.

      For example, having food inspected might be a wee bit important so you don't die. Or having the repairs inspected on the airplane you are sitting in might be a little important to you. And keep in mind the laws greatly limit the liability of the airlines and food producers because the laws presume inspections are actually occurring. Those limitations were not removed when the inspections stopped.

      There's also the little deal of breaking your promise to 800,000 people, but hey you Randians are really not big on keeping your word.

      but will be paid for doing nothing anyhow, once the shutdown is over?

      Btw, that's not guaranteed. Back pay would have to be explicitly authorized by Congress and signed by Trump. The only people who can count on getting paid are the ones who are currently working unpaid.

      Also, you seem to have forgotten that those folks can't just postpone their expenses until they are getting paid again. For some reason, they keep on insisting on eating despite not getting paid.

    2. Re:Now. How many average Americans miss it? by Chas · · Score: 0

      No. I realize it QUITE well.

      The problem with your examples are things that can (and in some cases actually ARE taken care of via private contractor).

      As for the 800,000 people? What promise was broken? Did the government suddenly pass a law stating that these people had universal and irrevocable employment until the end of time?

      NOPE!

      Are these people going to be paid for time they didn't work ANYHOW when the shutdown is over?

      YEP!

      They always do, and it's already handled.

      "Not guaranteed"

      https://www.foxnews.com/politi...

      You were saying?

      Yes, not all of them can.
      But, you think calling and dealing with your creditors, as opposed to just ignoring it and hoping it'll end five minutes ago, might give them some breathing room?

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    3. Re:Now. How many average Americans miss it? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      The problem with your examples are things that can (and in some cases actually ARE taken care of via private contractor).

      Guess what happens when the program isn't funded? The contractors can't do it either because they can't get paid for it.

      The contractors also will not get back pay.

      As for the 800,000 people? What promise was broken? Did the government suddenly pass a law stating that these people had universal and irrevocable employment until the end of time?

      We, through our elected representatives, promised we'd pay them for their work. We aren't paying them for their work. Hell, we are requiring that many of them work for free.

      But as I said, you Randians are really not all that big on keeping your promises.

      Are these people going to be paid for time they didn't work ANYHOW when the shutdown is over?

      Again, that has to be explicitly appropriated. There's no guarantee it will be. Also, those contractors you are so fond of will not be getting paid and never got paid during any previous shutdown.

      "Not guaranteed"

      https://www.foxnews.com/politi... [foxnews.com]

      You were saying?

      Still not appropriated. It's not actually guaranteed until it is. This bill is as binding as legislation declaring National Taco Day.

      But, you think calling and dealing with your creditors, as opposed to just ignoring it and hoping it'll end five minutes ago, might give them some breathing room?

      You've never had to deal with unhappy creditors in your life, have you?

      Also, which creditor do they call when they have that pesky desire to eat?

  102. GET RID OF SCHUMER JEWS IN GOV'T.! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

    Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.

    This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):

    Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):

    1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

    2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

    4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

    5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

    7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

    8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

    9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

    10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

    11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

    12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

    13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

    14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

    16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

    17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

    18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

    19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

    20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

    21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen H

  103. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  104. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  105. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by jbengt · · Score: 1

    Significant parts of the border did have walls, fences, etc. erected / fortified during the Bush and Obama years. There was a study on it what would do the most good where for what costs, and a lot of the recommendations were followed thru on.

  106. Nice vacation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking forward to the shutdown going many months - long enough for the country, business, citizens to stop depending on the federal government for non-essential functions.

    And, no you do not have a right to federal grants for your pet research project no matter how many years the handout has been your main income supply.

    And, without the federal spending, the country will not 'fall behind' in advancing in field ABC. One cannot measure that federal spending in field ABC will yield advances, so one cannot measure / prove that the lack of federal spending in that field will hurt advancements.

    Restate the quotes as 'X jobs in field ABC depend on federal handouts' and you get the real picture.

    It's entirely about jobs directly and indirectly tied to federal spending and not about the border wall. Indirectly, its about money going to persons for jobs or handouts which makes it back into the campaign coffers of political parties.

  107. WTF does WELFARE CREATE? THIS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read & STFU you undereducated (your bs is UNSUSTAINABLE for welfare if middle class = gone) https://news.slashdot.org/comm... DOLT!

    * You'd LOVE to see us ALL turned into HEROIN JUNKIES, potatos with NO DRIVE or HOPE/ASPIRATIONS on WELFARE, wouldn't you? That's what IT DOES (I've seen entire GENERATIONS IN A GHETTO NEARBY be VICTIM TO IT).

    Additionally, ASSHOLE - I have multiple degrees, 1 in Business/Economics (CS minor) w/ even more degreework in STRAIGHT Comp. Sci. - bring it on FUCK - I'll EAT YOU ALIVE!

    APK

    P.S.=> Don't TALK about Gov't. SPENDING on DEFENSE (very necessary - minus a BIG STICK, you're WEAK & SHIT, period (violence OR the POTENTIAL for it is BEHIND EVERY LAW - after all what ENFORCES ALL LAWS? THAT or the threat of pain financially (another form of 'violence') & yes, it's UNFORTUNATE men respond BEST to force but it WORKS))... apk

  108. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the wall doesn't work then why are you seething about it? Why not just let it get built? Think of it as a jobs program. It's not like the government doesn't waste billions on other make-work projects right? But for some reason this one really spins Democrats into an absolute rage...strange.

  109. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

    So Democrats want money for improved detainment facilities, additional judges to address the backlog of cases, and improved technology to provide a "virtual wall" in many locations, along with additional border agents? Hold that thought.

    I would say Democrats want money for things like single payer and green energy (or big pharma and the entertainment industry, if you're more of a cynic), but it turns out that you're somewhat right -- "sensible immigration reform that keeps America’s promise" is the third point listed on the DNC's page itemizing their self-professed beliefs. Digging a bit deeper about what specific actions that might entail, I find this, but the closest reference to anything you describe may be "strengthening in-country... processing", which is quite a far cry from the explicit points you make. As such, I'm not sure if your claim about what Democrats want money for is entirely accurate. I don't doubt that some Democrats have wanted money for some of these policies in the past, or want money for them presently, and I also wouldn't be surprised if Democrats as a party were willing to support policies like this as part of a broader compromise with Republicans, but you're making a much stronger claim for which there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence.

    First off, it was always a "scaled-down" solution - he never proposed a border-to-border wall fro $5.7BN, he wanted $25BN for a border-to-border wall, to be built over time - you know, the wall Democrats voted for in 2006.

    Presumably you're referring to H.R. 6061, 2006's Secure Fence Act, which both parties supported, but which was primarily opposed by Democrats (it's not clear why you'd think it was most accurate to describe this piece of legislation as "the wall Democrats voted for" and not "the wall Republicans voted for", since it enjoyed much greater support on the Republican side of the aisle). Note, the Secure Fence Act only included $1.4B in appropriations funding for the eponymous "Secure Fence" which it authorized, so it's not clear how you can cite the tepid support Democrats offered this earlier legislation (13 years ago, mind you) as evidence of Democrats' willingness to spend larger amounts on border security, whether $5.7B or $25B. At best, it's evidence that Democrats are willing to tolerate a certain nonzero level of spending increases when it comes to border security, which is consistent with what we're seeing today -- Democrats have offered some $1.3B-$1.6B in increased border funding in the last month or so.

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  110. The need for 60+ is literally what happened by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Can you:

    A) Not read.
    B) Not remember what you just read.

    Just curious since you seem to be ignoring what actually happened as in the news link I posted, instead just doubling down on your incorrect fantasy world.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  111. They absolutely negotiate with terrorists! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course they do! There are lives at stake!
    That's what a professional negotiator said.

    Nobody wants to be the one who could have done something when people died.

  112. How long till you fire trump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, he's not doing the work. Fire him. And since when did the USA give in to the demands of terrorists? Ronnie was dead set against it. You aren't.

  113. Re: SCHUMER JEWS HATE GOYIM/GENTILES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FYI, Yiddish is basically a High German dialect written with Hebrew letters. The name of the language itself reflects this, being a variation on Jüdisch. It's no more Turkic than you are, APK.

  114. Banks too big to fail. Ring a bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you claim that if the IPO falls over then its just going to lose banks money, so no problem? The banks were too big to fail before, so they were bailed out. They're even bigger now the republicans have ended dodd-franks.

    So tell me again how these banks will lose money, not taxpayers through government payouts...

  115. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  116. Foodstamps in danger? GOOD & WHY... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject: NOW, we'll find out IF the job #'s are right (a glut of jobs unable to be filled) since a starving person seeks work to eat.

    * NECESSITY (the ULTIMATE one, survival) IS THE MOTHER OF INVENTION!

    (I don't mean to be 'cruel' either but EVERYONE KNOWS there are a LOT of scumbags LEECHING the system (especially off folks like me who are homeowners paying OUTRAGEOUS taxes for welfare as I do in NY State (california MAY rival us) paying for it) - time to "flush them out" & see if jobs get filled creating OTHER taxpayers to help offload us homeowners (since the industrial taxbase was eroded by OFFSHORING scumbag execs for "mo' MONEY" (the root of all evil, especially THEIRS, greedy short-sighted SWINE))).

    Hey, look - I KNOW, that in NY State (per a pal of mine who works WELFARE FRAUD since I rent to folks on welfare @ times) IF YOU'RE OUT OF WORK, you can have up to $999,000 in the bank & GET FOODSTAMPS! FACT!

    WTF!

    THAT is wrong - I could do it, I just "make a living" & NOT 'super-wealthy' here (due to F'ing highest taxes & utilities combined in the USA in NY State afaik, correct me IF I am off here, TIA).

    I DO NOT TAKE THAT "AID" as I KNOW it cripples a person & is f'ing CHEATING as far as I am concerned.

    Take away a man's NEED to have DRIVE? You "kill" that MAN & make him LESS of a MAN - a potato.

    Satisfy his Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in pain/acceptance thresholds, it happens.

    Stops you from SELF- ACTUALIZATION imo (where YOU realize your potential & GIVE BACK TO SOCIETY thru creativity etc. as I am attempting via https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... BECAUSE I CAN & I am after that VERY same PERSONAL GOAL for my own good & yes, the GOOD of others too...)

    LASTLY: HEY YOU UGLY DISGUSTING FATFUCK PSEUDO INTELLECTUAL SCUMBAGE FAKENAME "PopeFATZO": I notice you had to DOWNMOD HIDE last time I posted this & the discussion under you - you're a LOSER & proven STUPID fatboy (Don't like it? Let's do it another way in person "Mr. Martial Artist" MY ASS you FAT ugly PUNK).

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & I don't have $999,000 in the bank either (I still won't STOOP SO LOW as to take a kid's food THAT NEEDS IT if his parents are down on their luck OR BUMS, is why - I could, but I don't - but a LOT OF SCUM WILL - dirty motherfucking bastards)... apk

  117. Democrat house already passed one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Republican Senate refuses to vote on it. Because the GOP leader of that house refuses to let one be made.
    So if you REFUSE to blame trump for it, despite it being 100% trump's shutdown, and you don't want to blame the GOP, then you gotta blame Mitch.

  118. Quote StarTrek TOS (for geeks)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ANDROID RUK in "What are little girls made of": "THAT was the EQUATION: Survival/existence must CANCEL OUT PROGRAMMING!"

    * Programming folks giving us welfare checks to MAKE US INTO LACKADAISICAL DIRT (potatos as I alluded to in my post PARENT to this one https://news.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> It's just like FAKEBOOK was caught doing basically - a psychological SOCIAL experiment to see how they can "STEER THE CATTLE" right into the Judas GOAT pen for slaughter... apk

  119. LASTLY: HEY YOU UGLY DISGUSTING FATFUCK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & link PSEUDO INTELLECTUAL SCUMBAGE FAKENAME "PopeFATZO": I notice you had to DOWNMOD https://news.slashdot.org/comm... HIDE last time I posted that!

    (... & the discussion under you - you're a LOSER & proven STUPID fatboy (Don't like it? Let's do it another way in person "Mr. Martial Artist" MY ASS you FAT ugly PUNK)).

    * Don't even TRY tell me "I'm a REGISTERED 'luser'" & can't downmod in same discussion tree - SOCKPUPPET MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS allow for it & knowing YOU, a FAKE NAME & FAKE IN LIFE LIAR?

    You use them, almost GUARANTEED...

    APK

    P.S.=> I truly DO KNOW your kind FATBOY MOOLIE... apk

  120. Bullshit Estimate, Wrong Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First of all, it's not $5.7 billion. That's pure Trump Bullshit. Steven Colbert put together an ad-hoc group of experts (which automatically excludes Trump). You know the number they came up with? $2 trillion. Let that sink in for a moment.

    Once they build one mile of wall for $5.7 billion, they will be back for more. Again and again, until the $2 trillion is spent. Then you spend even more maintaining the wall because it starts degrading rather quickly. In fact you can never stop spending the maintenance bucks because, should you do so, "well everyone knows you have to save the $2 trillion investment by maintaining it!" In fact, this is also the argument that explodes the wall budget from $5.7 billion to $2 trillion. "Everyone knows that a partial wall is no good, and besides, we've already spent $1 trillion, you don't want to waste $1 trillion do you??"

    The wall is like infrastructure drugs. Once you start you can't stop. Therefore, Just Say No To Wall!

    Second point. The Republican Party used to be the party of fiscal responsibility. What happened to that party? What happened to that logic? Spending money is now seen by the Republicans like some water fight, just hose the government down with money, it's no big deal. Who cares about flushing away $5.7 billion? After all they wasted all that money on the War in Iraq, what was that, another $1 trillion? It's just taxpayer's money so who cares?

    The Republican Party: Tax & Spend Conservatives.

    Spending the government coin because it's Other People's Money.

  121. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

    That said, 1/3 is nothing to scoff at and should still be a no-brainer.

    That assumes that 1/3rd are incapable of finding a ladder. Or an abrasive cut-off saw. Or a boat.

  122. The "wall" is part of a border control system. by couchslug · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The "wall" is part of a border control system. Physical barriers must be surveilled and have human pickets available. The successful "walls" (built by Israel, Saudi, and Hungary) are monitored and patrolled. They don't just sit there awaiting circumvention or breaching.

    Unfortunately the American public can't understand words longer than four letters so "wall" has taken over the discussion.

    If "walls" don't work I must have hallucinated the Berlin Wall when I was stationed in West Germany. Those who want open borders should advocate suitable legislation.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w...

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:The "wall" is part of a border control system. by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2

      East Germany was a essentially a prison - the wall was there to keep people in, and it was patrolled from the inside (built by and patrolled by Mexico in your analogy).
      I can't imagine how you think this is analogous to Trump's vanity wall.

    2. Re:The "wall" is part of a border control system. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The "wall" is part of a border control system. Physical barriers must be surveilled and have human pickets available. The successful "walls" (built by Israel, Saudi, and Hungary) are monitored and patrolled. They don't just sit there awaiting circumvention or breaching.

      Unfortunately the American public can't understand words longer than four letters so "wall" has taken over the discussion.

      If "walls" don't work I must have hallucinated the Berlin Wall when I was stationed in West Germany. Those who want open borders should advocate suitable legislation.

      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w...

      Berlin's wall didn't work. My grandmother for one escaped across it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  123. Re: SCHUMER JEWS HATE GOYIM/GENTILES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Explain to us why racist jews get kicked nation to nation first and antisemitic would be true IF they had semite blood in them. Ashkenazi do not. Palestinians are more semitic and before it was used in germany (it has some German in it) it is from a Turkic dialect. Ashkenazi jews use it and they have no semitic blood. So much for your antisemite protected class lies! Save your juden science jedi mindtrick lies for stupid people jew.

  124. Why doesn't Trump act like an Adult? by bussdriver · · Score: 2

    It is only a $5 billion pet project; hardly worth costing the country more than $5 billion in another manufactured crisis.

    Remember the last manufactured crisis to create a hostage situation? Literally kidnapping children and holding them hostage; so how anybody couldn't see that this completely predictable if they were paying attention to his threats to his own party over his wall a year ago-- who didn't give it to him either.

    The shutdown began before the Democrats got into office; he had a compromise he rejected multiple times and continues to do so while the SENATE CAN IGNORE TRUMP and pass something if Mitch would allow them to vote. (FYI, Mitch's wife works for Trump; aside from him probably being a stooge, Trump has a hold over him.)

    1. Re:Why doesn't Trump act like an Adult? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Because Trump is not an adult.

  125. Don't worry guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't worry guys, this is all part of the master plan to make America great again.

  126. Re:Could Trump's shutdown bring about a debt crisi by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Where are you getting this $44trillion number from? US GDP is half that.

    My apologies, I missed a decimal point.. it's $ 4.4 Trillion... But my "real life" example numbers are still in the correct ratio. $57 vrs $44,000 income.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  127. I Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do not understand what the problem is. Has the Government not repealed itself and there is no longer any need to have anything to do with it? If the Government is no longer doing X, then obviously you ought to be doing X for your self and any requirement that you let the Government do X is null and void since the Government has chosen to be incapable of doing it.

  128. Another hit -- OBAMACARE subsidies by Btrot69 · · Score: 1

    My wife and I have been depending on Obamacare subsidies for our healthcare while she takes care of her elderly parents and I take care of mine.

    First of all, the new administration demanded a lot of extra paperwork this year to prove that our part-time jobs did not offer healthcare.

    Now, after a lot of hassle, we've uploaded our documents -- but now -- there are no federal workers around to approve them and turn the subsides on.
    Because of our age, we're now paying ~$2000/mo for heathcare.
    We are lucky -- we have savings to cover it and get it back with next year's tax refund.

    But, for the folks the subsidy was intended for -- poor low-income workers -- they will be losing their insurance.

  129. A real shutdown wold make regulations irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A real shutdown wold make government unnecessary and regulations irrelevant because there would be no enforcement mechanism. Therefore a free market would develop to solve any problems that remain. Rather than doing things in an efficient matter a minority fight to control us and do it in the LEAST efficient way (ie via government) possible at the cost and burden to to the rest of us.

    Drugs hurting people? Someone would start an review site for drugs. Ohh right, we had that. It was called the Silk Road 1.0. There were even educated scientists and doctors who were going to support it to reduce issues resulting of potentially fake drugs. That is they would test the drugs and report on the authenticity so you wouldn't get some look-alike drug or risk overdosing etc.

  130. All of the money in the world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't matter if it costs 10 times our GDP this year. You DO NOT give in to little kids throwing temper tantrums or they'll do it every fucking time for the smallest of reasons. You whoop that ass and put them on the fucking couch staring at nothing useful until they act right. Also, "Not giving in to terrorists" is supposed to be YOUR battlecry. Your god Ronnie Raygun used it judiciously.
    trump is acting like a child terrorist. Treat him accordingly.

    1. Re:All of the money in the world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you should never stand down, give in, or apologize to American liberals.

  131. Simple solution by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    Tell up Chuckie Schumer & Nancy Stretch Pelosi to FUND THE WALL. Problem solved. But no! They were "against" the wall, after they were FOR the wall.

  132. He loves illegals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe if t-dog didn't want illegals working here, HE SHOULD STOP HIRING THEM.

  133. But OOOOOOBama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya mean, like, McConnel, Ryan, and the boys did when Obama was running things? Hypocrite harder.

  134. Always wanting to take away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do you advocate to take away something people have instead of advcating that YOU TOO get a nice pension. This is the problem with conservatives like you (yes the fuck you are regardless of what you claimed 2 posts up). You'd rather pull everyone else into your own mire of shit instead of pulling yourself up out of that mire. Use those bootstraps you guys claim you pull so hard on. Jealousy does not become you.

  135. Simpler reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't give in to extortion. If you give in, the bully will take more next time. You have to punch his lights out.

  136. So, YOU are the reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I lost my doctor AND my plan AND I'm certainly NOT saving $2500 per year (all three are violations of specific promises Obama and Schumer and Pelosi made hundreds of times).

    My current policy has far higher deductibles, higher co-pays, and the rates nearly tripled after "Obamacare" AKA the Affordable Care Act kicked in.

    Apparently, YOU get to work part time and devote the rest of your time to family care while people like me work our butts off AND take care of family AND pay more and more money for less and less. It's one thing to ask for a little needed help. It's a step further to take advantage of a new government handout (of other people's hard-earned money taken from them at gunpoint). But it's a whole step further into mind-boggling selfishness to get mad at other people when something puts a TEMPORARY kink into the system of armed robbery you are benefitting from. It would be nice if people like you who benefit from this theft showed a little more patience for the exasperated people paying the bills when they finally manage to get SOMEBODY (Trump, in this case) willing to stand firm and fight for just ONE THING (border security, which would help limit the number of new people added to the list of recipients of stolen money).

    A begger who whines and complains about temporary interruptions in the handouts is just amazingly offensive.

  137. So...not a shutdown after all then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    apparently all the parts of government that demand licensing, certification, fees, taxes, etc are still up and running at full force......

    it's just the parts that are required to help the citizen or business comply with those other parts that are idled.....

    So, it's just the typical governmental evil trick of always closing the things people need and NOT the parts people do not want, as a way to squeeze the population into pressuring their political representatives into knuckling under and doing what the unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats want done. It's not Trump or the congress that has determined what runs and what idles in a shutdown - it's unelected officials who are supposedly "experts" but whom none of us has ever heard the name of (and we've certainly never seen any of their resumes to know if they really are "experts"). This is not just a federal scam; all levels of government do this. When states, cities, or counties have a supposed lack of money, they always close the stuff that will hurt families the most (schools, libraries, parks). Citizens need to wizen-up to how this scam works.

  138. Ammo box situation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We tried the ballot, now we need some daisy pushing done. ...Although a daisy cutter might work if you get the right diameter target...

  139. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep calling people you don't like racist. See how that works when nobody believes you when you find a real one.

  140. Re:Why do Democrats hate American citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump is sexually attracted to women? Oh lord, impeach him now!
    Trump places the good of actual American citizens over the citizens of literally any other country? That's treason!

    Meanwhile in the real world, Trump is just doing what he promised he'd do: The will of the American people as determined by his elected status as President. The DNC should never have torpedoed itself by propping up the least electable candidate of all time.

  141. Suicide bombings aren't the only problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suicide bombings aren't the sole reason to have a wall. (Domestic bombers can roll their own worn IEDS. )

    Preventing guerrilla attacks from the outside is more than ample reason to have picketed barriers. Stopping/slowing enemy infantry is a major reason picketed barriers are used in war, including forward operating bases.

    The only reason to object to the wall is if one favors open borders, but most of those objecting are playing the same game Trump is, budget brinksmanship, for political reasons.

  142. Who is in charge? by stepho-wrs · · Score: 1

    All the organs of the body were having a meeting, trying to decide who was the one in charge.
    "I should be in charge," said the brain, "Because I run all the body's systems, so without me nothing would happen."
    "I should be in charge," said the blood , "because I circulate oxygen all over so without me you'd all waste away."
    "I should be in charge," said the stomach , "because I process food and give all of you energy."
    "I should be in charge," said the legs , "because I carry the body wherever it needs to go."
    "I should be in charge," said the eyes, "Because I allow the body to see where it goes."
    "I should be in charge," said the rectum , "Because I'm responsible for waste removal."
    All the other body parts laughed at the rectum and insulted him, so in a huff, he shut down tight.
    Within a few days, the brain had a terrible headache, the stomach was bloated, the legs got wobbly, the eyes got watery, and the blood was toxic. They all decided that the rectum should be the boss.

    The Moral of the story?
    The ass hole is usually in charge!

  143. Smoke and mirrors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trumps real goal is to clense the governemt of drift wood. Those in the shutdown can only survive for as long as they have savings. Soon they need to pay their mortgages. So they find work elsewhere. At the end of the shut Trump gets new people into the backbone of the government who are trump apologists.
    This is a very dangerous time for your country as well as the rest of the world.

  144. SOCK PUPPET ALERT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    udachny is a sock puppet of roman_mir. the latter uses the former to try to convince more people that the foundational principles of his cult are righteous and sane. they both often post at -1 (and have their postings limited here on slashdot) because they have poor karma scores here as a result of repeated abusive behavior and their consistent religious proselytizing that is seldom on topic with the discussion thread.