# Welp, the Government shutdown starts now



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 1, 2013)

U.S. government shutdown begins after Congress fails to break impasse | Reuters


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 1, 2013)

It's not the first time. The country didn't go to shit last time, and as long as they get this shit sorted quick, it won't this time, either.

Emphasis on *as long as*. I'm not sure how high my hopes are on that one.


----------



## petereanima (Oct 1, 2013)

Funny side-note about this: I am currently watching "The West Wing" series with my girlfriend, and right after exactly this happened in the series, we stopped watching, turned on the news - and saw this. Very strange deja vu stuff.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 1, 2013)

petereanima said:


> Funny side-note about this: I am currently watching "The West Wing" series with my girlfriend, and right after exactly this happened in the series, we stopped watching, turned on the news - and saw this. Very strange deja vu stuff.


 
Well everything goes to hell under Martin Sheen, just look at Charlie.


----------



## tacotiklah (Oct 1, 2013)

My aunt and uncle are both disabled and receive SSI benefits. People like that are the ones that suffer the most, and they didn't have a damn thing to do with any of this. 

This is the government holding the people hostage while they have their damn turf wars. I'm pissed to the point that I feel we should boot them all out, every single one of them regardless of party affiliation, and restructure our government. This is getting ridiculous.


----------



## Dalcan (Oct 1, 2013)

GL HF!!!


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 1, 2013)

ghstofperdition said:


> My aunt and uncle are both disabled and receive SSI benefits. People like that are the ones that suffer the most, and they didn't have a damn thing to do with any of this.
> 
> This is the government holding the people hostage while they have their damn turf wars. I'm pissed to the point that I feel we should boot them all out, every single one of them regardless of party affiliation, and restructure our government. This is getting ridiculous.


 
All essential services continue without delay (for now), so even calling it a "shutdown" is just political posturing.


----------



## lurgar (Oct 1, 2013)

Watching this happen last night, I got the distinct impression that many of the moderate Republicans didn't want the shutdown to happen and were perfectly fine with passing a clean CR for now just to avoid one. Unfortunately, the extremists in the party were dead set on trying to run the government in the ground unless they got the ACA defunded. This marks the 40th or so time the Republican party has tried to stop Obamacare, even after it was passed into law, even after it was upheld by the Supreme Court. 

It has been a peeve of mine for a while that there is this attitude that both parties are equally at fault here. It's true that both major parties have their faults, but one of them is at least trying to get some health care reform going and the other is hellbent on running the country into the ground if they don't get their way. 


In some good news, the health care exchanges are open now, so people can start getting their health care. Open exchanges are open now until March 31st. 
Government Healthcare Website
Having looked into it, I would actually be able to save money on my health care costs if I didn't already have health insurance through my work place.


----------



## pink freud (Oct 1, 2013)

lurgar said:


> Watching this happen last night, I got the distinct impression that many of the moderate Republicans didn't want the shutdown to happen and were perfectly fine with passing a clean CR for now just to avoid one. Unfortunately, the extremists in the party were dead set on trying to run the government in the ground unless they got the ACA defunded. This marks the 40th or so time the Republican party has tried to stop Obamacare, even after it was passed into law, even after it was upheld by the Supreme Court.
> 
> It has been a peeve of mine for a while that there is this attitude that both parties are equally at fault here. It's true that both major parties have their faults, but one of them is at least trying to get some health care reform going and the other is hellbent on running the country into the ground if they don't get their way.
> 
> ...



My blue highlight is what they really want. The red is just their current excuse. Reference Norquist's "Starve the Beast."


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 1, 2013)

The Democrat controlled Senate hasn't passed any budget plan for several years now, so anyone blaming the Tea Party element for this is just misinformed or in complete denial.
Operating even a household budget, let alone a nation, without a budget plan is running the nation and it's future into the ground.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 1, 2013)

Having a budget doesn't solve everything, look at my home state. We have a budget and we stay within it yet everything is still shit. The tea party here is so hell bent on grandstanding and political posturing that we've turned down money that our state _needs_ just for morons to make their ....ing points. Ted Cruz is just looking for the spotlight so he can have more of a chance to win the governor seat and then I'm sure the presidential (as most politicians are guided by this). 

From what I understand neither party has been able to agree on a budget and by the time one gets to the Senate for a vote it is merely a shell of what it was in the beginning. We all know how both parties in the last decade are stubborn as hell. I'm personally sick of them both, but the parties I support won't be gaining ground anytime soon. However, the tea party is perfectly okay with destroying this country to get what they want and to me that is a problem. It's also the reason the republican party is a mere shadow of what it used to be.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 1, 2013)

There are only 6 more Dems in the Senate than there are Repubs. I get tired of hearing about 'control' - especially in the context of playing the blame game - when the numbers are this close. Further, regardless of the numbers, only one party is playing the obstructionist game.

And I'm even more sick of comparisons between the National budget and any individual's household budget. Apples and oranges. Our government doesn't just pay a few bills, balance their checkbook, then call it a day. On the flipside, a direct comparison would imply that I should respond with "End all the abortions!!!" when my wife suggests that we'll be underwater after paying our mortgage and utility bills. 

Finally, there was no lack of budget plans being _proposed_ by the majority, and _both_ sides of the aisle are to blame in that none of the proposed budgets passed.


----------



## tedtan (Oct 1, 2013)

flint757 said:


> both parties in the last decade are stubborn as hell. I'm personally sick of them both


 
Yeah, I know the feeling - do we vote for the Giant Douche or the Turd Sandwich?


Douche and Turd (Season 8, Episode 8) - Full Episode Player - South Park Studios


----------



## lurgar (Oct 1, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> The Democrat controlled Senate hasn't passed any budget plan for several years now, so anyone blaming the Tea Party element for this is just misinformed or in complete denial.
> .



I'm not sure where you're going with this. There was a budget passed, and the debt ceiling is preventing the government from being able to pay on those debts. Are you saying that the element of the Republican party that was dead set on defunding Obamacare over the debt ceiling wasn't the primary cause for this shutdown?

Also, the government's debt is not the same as a household's debt.


----------



## HUGH JAYNUS (Oct 1, 2013)

time to sneak into canada.....


----------



## Vostre Roy (Oct 1, 2013)

METAL_WIZARD said:


> time to sneak into _*Harperia*_.....



Meh, post corrected. Right now our country is ruled by a nuthead, sorry if this offend anybody, but I have yet to find somebody that doesn't agree with that statement...

/OT. I'll leave you guys at your country now.


----------



## SoItGoesRVA (Oct 1, 2013)

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-september-30-2013/jon-stewart-s-rockin--shutdown-eve

Nailed it.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 1, 2013)

The only bad thing is that the Republican leadership caved in last time this came up. Thanks for the Tea Party's strength in finally standing up to these leftist maggots.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima (Oct 1, 2013)

We can't agree on anything. .... it. Let's go home and drink.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 1, 2013)

Congressmen still get paid during a shutdown. I wonder how their decisions would be different if they didn't.


----------



## tacotiklah (Oct 1, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Congressmen still get paid during a shutdown. I wonder how their decisions would be different if they didn't.




I feel this would sum up their reactions nicely:






And Jon Stewart had the best analogy of this yet:
"The Giants lost last night to the Redskins 31-7. The Giants didn't tell the Redskins, "Hey, give us 25 more points by midnight tonight, or we'll shut down the whole ....ing NFL!""


----------



## skeels (Oct 1, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Congressmen still get paid during a shutdown. I wonder how their decisions would be different if they didn't.



I'm sure it would be like when I miss a paycheck- go waterskiing, eat at five star restaurants, buy a Toyota Prius for my nanny and take my Yorkie to the groomer. 

Maybe catch up on some reading.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 1, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Congressmen still get paid during a shutdown. I wonder how their decisions would be different if they didn't.



Especially since it affects peoples jobs that they are doing this at all. I mean NASA employees aren't even allowed in the ....ing building over this bullshit. They even shutdown websites.

Let the GOP have their temper tantrum over a bill that hasn't even dipped its toes in the water yet, was passed with concessions to the GOP at the time and has been approved by the supreme court. ....ing denial. Reminds me of what Rick Perry said during the protest after his 'special session'. That 'we were voted in by the people and will do what WE think is best' (essentially, paraphrasing a bit). It seems, based on various conversations I've heard by politicians, that some of them believe that we vote them in based solely on party affiliation and charisma. Then after that point they are allowed to do as they please. 

Good news is Ted Cruz can never run for president at least.


----------



## JD27 (Oct 2, 2013)

So much fun, I get to go to work... but will I be paid?


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

flint757 said:


> I mean NASA employees aren't even allowed in the ....ing building over this bullshit.



WHO IS GOING TO SPY ON US?!?!?!?!?! The Terrorizors will surely strike now.

OT:
BTW this shutdown has happened 17 times since 1977, so I'm not buying into the "sky is falling" mentality. 
You wanna talk about extremist lets talk about Sen. Tom Harkin; this asshat is quoted as saying the shutdown would beas dangerous as the breakup of the Union before the Civil War.

America needs a re-start button


----------



## flint757 (Oct 2, 2013)

Sky is definitely not falling and indeed it has happened many times before, but I find it more frustrating that they are allowed to do this at all and that it puts people/businesses ultimately not even relevant to the discussion in congress in an unnecessary rough spot. I said NASA not NSA by the way (can't tell if you're being a smart ass or not).

I don't know about a full on restart, but I wouldn't mind giving all the politicians currently employed the boot.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 2, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Well everything goes to hell under Martin Sheen, just look at Charlie.



The Mighty Wanks movies aside, his other son Emilio has been in some pretty awesome films. 

As for the gubment, I'm ....ing sick of them. I'll just resort to sage advice from an insane man: "If there's a new way, I'll be the first in line... but it better work this time."


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

flint757 said:


> I said NASA not NSA by the way (can't tell if you're being a smart ass or not)



This Just In. I CAN'T READ

Im sure NASA spies on us too, and more than likely the moon has terrorist. My comment stands.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 2, 2013)

mcd said:


> This Just In. I CAN'T READ
> 
> Im sure NASA spies on us too, and more than likely the moon has terrorist. My comment stands.



No, the alien terrorists are on Mars. The rest is true though; NASA spies on us to put a minus mark on our resumes if we don't believe that the US has gone to the moon. And if so, then we don't get invited to the special meetings or get the promotions at work, similar to They Live. Btw, the moon is filled with gubment cheese and anthrax. That's how the zompocalypse will start.


EDIT: And before I forget, something a little more serious: United, we'll fail. Divided, we'll fall. We're ....ed, but they're making it so much worse.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 2, 2013)

Perhaps there should be a law enacted that states that if congress has such problems getting anything accomplished that the government shuts down, all members of congress will be dismissed and elections will be held to replace them. All dismissed members will be permanently ineligible for reelection to Federal office of any kind. With pretty much any other occupation, you get fired for not doing your goddamned job.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 2, 2013)

mcd said:


> This Just In. I CAN'T READ
> 
> Im sure NASA spies on us too, and more than likely the moon has terrorist. My comment stands.





No doubt about. Perfect hiding spot too.


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Perhaps there should be a law enacted that states that if congress has such problems getting anything accomplished that the government shuts down, all members of congress will be dismissed and elections will be held to replace them. All dismissed members will be permanently ineligible for reelection to Federal office of any kind. With pretty much any other occupation, you get fired for not doing your goddamned job.



Good in theory, I think it would be a debacle though. I would like to see term limits but on congress and the senate. No reason to have 30+ veterans in there, I say 8 years like the Pres.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 2, 2013)

It would definitely lower the age of congress which would be nice for a change. I think adding a max consecutive term limits would be a better idea. That way it forces new blood into the system, but allows some of them to come back after at least 1 or 2 terms if they happened to be pretty good at their job.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 2, 2013)

So congressional staffers get no pay, their bosses do, and the NSA is still spying on the rest of us.

As a dirty foreigner (who happens to be in the world majority of non-USAians) I'd like to tell your government to go and .... itself.

Land of the Free? Land of the Hypocritical, more like.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 2, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> The only bad thing is that the Republican leadership caved in last time this came up. Thanks for the Tea Party's strength in finally standing up to these leftist maggots.



Ahahahahaha, leftist? What world do you live in, exactly? Dems and Rebubs are both ultimately beholden to the mighty Dollar.

But then again you might be a tea-bagging libertarian. In which case, why do you hate America?


----------



## fwd0120 (Oct 2, 2013)

ITT: Illegal aliens are in Uranus.


----------



## AndrewFTMfan (Oct 2, 2013)

I go to school at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio and for those that don't know, we are right next to Wright Patterson Air Force Base. Apparently, so much for the government paying our service men and women.... the base only has enough funds to last about two weeks, or so I've heard. But in all seriousness, it's bullshit that people around here are out of work today because the government can't get their shit together....


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

flint757 said:


> but allows some of them to come back after at least 1 or 2 terms if they happened to be pretty good at their job.


 
So what you're saying is no one would come back right?


----------



## tedtan (Oct 2, 2013)

^


----------



## flint757 (Oct 2, 2013)

mcd said:


> So what you're saying is no one would come back right?





Indeed.


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

BTW the shutdown still cost 12.5m an hour....thank god we're slowing our rabid spending habits!


----------



## flint757 (Oct 2, 2013)

I wish I could get paid to deliberately not work. One can dream.


----------



## bcolville (Oct 2, 2013)

I think this has happened around 17 times starting in the 70's. Judging by the markets thus far, not many people seem to be bothered by this, and rightfully so.


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

bcolville said:


> I think this has happened around 17 times starting in the 70's. Judging by the markets thus far, not many people seem to be bothered by this, and rightfully so.



you are correct sir, a wise man brought this to everyone's attention earlier.
I'll go ahead and quote him


mcd said:


> BTW this shutdown has happened 17 times since 1977



I hear he is a passionate lover as well as a fact throwing genius


----------



## AxeHappy (Oct 2, 2013)

But he has troubles reading.


----------



## Vhyle (Oct 2, 2013)

So, for those of us in the military...

Guaranteed pay up until December, after that = ???
All schools closed (for on-post schools)
All current medboards (servicemembers in process of being medically chaptered) are on hold.
No civilian contractors are working, unless they are on a pre-paid contract.
ALL tuition assistance for education is cancelled.


----------



## mcd (Oct 2, 2013)

Vhyle said:


> So, for those of us in the military...
> 
> No civilian contractors are working, unless they are on a pre-paid contract.
> .



Thank GOD! I'm bought and paid for already


----------



## bcolville (Oct 3, 2013)

mcd said:


> you are correct sir, a wise man brought this to everyone's attention earlier.
> I'll go ahead and quote him
> 
> 
> I hear he is a passionate lover as well as a fact throwing genius



My apologies, I did not intend to steal your excellent observation.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 3, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Ahahahahaha, leftist? What world do you live in, exactly? Dems and Rebubs are both ultimately beholden to the mighty Dollar.
> 
> But then again you might be a tea-bagging libertarian. In which case, why do you hate America?


 
On your first point I agree that most of the current politicians are in the same circle of bought and paid for legislation.

On the second point I don't agree.
I've observed the vast majority of the Tea Party movement to be far more traditionalism oriented, and the vast majority of those on the left to support social transformation that includes much more governmental involvement in our day to day lives, more regulations, more wealth redistribution, and ultimately more dependency on the government which is VERY un-American.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 3, 2013)

For whatever reason, you've just made me think of the season 2 finale of Newsroom. In response to a question about whether he considers himself a Republican just so he can claim credibility when he attacks the GOP, the character played by Jeff Daniels responds as follows:



Will McAvoy said:


> No, I call myself a Republican because I am one. I believe in market solutions and common sense realities and the necessity to defend ourselves against a dangerous world and that&#8217;s about it.
> 
> The problem is now I have to be homophobic.
> I have to count the number to times people go to church.
> ...



Point being, all of the things he says there are more or less in line with my perception of how the Tea Party and surrounding GOP have chosen to present themselves. The obstructionism has been clear from the beginning of Obama's presidency, and there's nothing 'traditional' about it. The shutdown is only the latest development.

Ransom is not synonymous with compromise. The fact is that the ACA was passed by both houses and upheld by the Supreme Court. There is a legal way to continue to amend the law, but playing a game of chicken with the government shutdown is not it.



> trea·son
> &#712;tr&#275;z&#601;n
> noun
> 1.
> the crime of betraying one's country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.



Maybe I'm taking an extreme viewpoint here, but I'd suggest the obstructionist tactics of the far-Right absolutely fall under the above definition.

I hate to throw hyperbole around, but I think it's pretty fair to say that this is effectively a hostage situation.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 3, 2013)

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-us-government-shut-down-because-everything-is-stupid



And an interesting link from that article:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...efund-obamacare-suicide-caucus-geography.html

.... *edits*



TRENCHLORD said:


> On your first point I agree that most of the current politicians are in the same circle of bought and paid for legislation.



Hehe.



TRENCHLORD said:


> On the second point I don't agree.
> I've observed the vast majority of the Tea Party movement to be far more traditionalism oriented, and the vast majority of those on the left to support social transformation that includes much more governmental involvement in our day to day lives, more regulations, more wealth redistribution, and ultimately more dependency on the government which is VERY un-American.



The ironic thing is that the "traditionalism" that Tea Partiers are voting for is the old days of the rail barons and the wild west - and is funded by the same interest groups*. What I find highly amusing (well, frightening tbh) is that the majority of those voters will be the ones who are going to end at the bottom of the heap without any of the rights and benefits that the last century has provided. Workers rights? Nope. EPA? Nope, hope that the kids like drinking polluted water. Etc, etc.

Kinda like a turkey voting for Christmas.

And what's wrong with transforming something that's broken (your healthcare system, for example)? Good government should have a duty of care to the people, shouldn't it?

I understand Libertarianism as a concept, but it should stay that way - a concept. It's as broken in real life as Communism is and for the same reasons: it absolutely ignores how human societies work in reality, and how such a system can be implemented.

FWIW I am ideologically an anarchist. However I am mature enough (many aren't, same with many libertarians) to know that it would not work in the real world.... Next best thing, if I am to have a government, is one that actually works for all members, not just the sociopathic ones.

*Old, rich, very white men.


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 3, 2013)

synrgy said:


> \ definition.
> 
> I hate to throw hyperbole around, but I think it's pretty fair to say that this is effectively a hostage situation.



you're right it's hyperbole. 

this is being blown up by the media and the PR team of the Democrat party (which honestly has some the great political strategists who know how to work the game for results). why this is blown up in three easy to follow points 

1) Democrat Speaker Tip O'Neill had 12 shutdowns in the length of his speakership. does anybody remember that? no of course not as the majority of us on the board have not lived that long and the guy died back in '94, maybe the handful of over-40s on here will remember him. but that's hardly the point. the point is in his time as speaker ('77 to '87) he had 12 shutdowns, that means 1.2 shutdowns for every year he held the gavel. is that treasonous? of course it's not, in fact it's protected under article one of the constitution. so yeah, invalid argument is invalid read a book. 

2) this has only affected 28% of government workers. essentially panties are in a bundle over non-essential personnel being furloughed. i work at a local news station, and we've been running story after story about how local public employees are having to tighten their belts up and budget better. my reaction? congratulations! now you know how over 10% of the unemployed has felt for the past 3 years! and you know how the even larger percentage of under-employed feel! in fact, with your sob story i can now highlight that an even larger percentage of people have been hurt far worse over the last 6 years and NOBODY HAS GIVEN A SH!T THIS BIG! and furthermore this pales in comparison to the amount of black men and teens which have an unemployment number that is nearing 45% (where's the story on that? did anybody know this is the most amount of blacks that have been unemployed since the great depression? do we only care about the middle-class-white- public workers?) so yeah, not a lot of sympathy beyond my condolences that you won't get a paycheck this week (been there and done that). 

but i lose the ability to feel any deeper sympathies when i remember that because they are only furloughed, and not laid off, that these people will get back pay owed to them..... what. a. tragedy. 

3) The administration has done very well to play this up as a crisis (and why not? americans suck at remembering their own history). right now the other big emotional plea thats being covered extensively by the puppets that are the news stations, is that all the national monuments are being shutdown, and in a very vulgar display are being fenced off. 

now let's ask ourselves a few questions: when is the last time you paid somebody to go walk up to the Lincoln/Washington memorial? that's right you never have. funny little story from the daily caller today, turns out that the whole monument thing is complete bullsh!t  

So basically you're being suckered into thinking this is a bad thing when in reality this is hardly a blip on the radar screen. this is all about optics, this is all about 2014 elections, this is not about people (hence why the democratic party has refused to vote on smaller bills to fund other areas of government). now the president is waving the social security-check flag... the worst part is despite the fact that SS and medicare checks are not cut during a shutdown, there are enough morons who will believe it. 

i will say this about the GOP though. whoever they hire as strategists should be fired. seriously they can't f*ck their way out of a paper bag on this one because they never set up their ground game before hand. if Boehner actually wanted to go through with this and have seats in the house come 2014 he should've actually gotten some more counter-messaging out there, started running ads, instructed reps to return to their districts and hold townhalls (in order to avoid the losing battle on national media). they have no teeth and they dont have message. the only thing saving them right now is that likely voters hate Pelosi and Reid as much as they hate Boehner. its like goddamn amateur hour out there.



hairychris said:


> http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-us-government-shut-down-because-everything-is-stupid
> 
> 
> The ironic thing is that the "traditionalism" that Tea Partiers are voting for is the old days of the rail barons and the wild west - and is funded by the same interest groups*. What I find highly amusing (well, frightening tbh) is that the majority of those voters will be the ones who are going to end at the bottom of the heap without any of the rights and benefits that the last century has provided. Workers rights? Nope. EPA? Nope, hope that the kids like drinking polluted water. Etc, etc.



provide one instance in which a "tea party" elected candidate has once proposed legislation that outlawed private sector unions, de-funding the EPA (which needs reformation like tomorrow but thats another discussion), and getting rid of infrastructural standards (that actually falls under state jurisdiction, which increased states rights is a tenant of that movement). proof or fail. very simple. but im afriad your concept of american politics is being filter through three levels of media before you see it on your side of the pond (hence why i dont comment in european and british political threads, not qualified enough and my coverage over here is too minimal for me to have an opinion).


----------



## synrgy (Oct 3, 2013)

I think you may have mistook my post to be exclusive to the shutdown. I'm trying to speak more to the overall obstructionism that kicked in when Obama won his first term.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 3, 2013)

synrgy said:


> Ransom is not synonymous with compromise.



This is what has irked me the most about the last 2 terms of republicans. They keep trying to 'compromise' by really holding something/someone ransom or putting up ultimatums. Then they sit there and say, "see they won't talk with us or compromise". Sorry, but compromise takes 2 or more parties AND ransom (give me what I want or...) is not synonymous with compromise (as quoted above).



hairychris said:


> I understand Libertarianism as a concept, but it should stay that way - a concept. It's as broken in real life as Communism is and for the same reasons: it absolutely ignores how human societies work in reality, and how such a system can be implemented.



This I completely agree with. Some things just work better in theory than they ever will in reality.



Ibanezsam4 said:


> 1) ...in fact it's protected under article one of the constitution. so yeah, invalid argument is invalid read a book.



Under a strict legal definition of treason sure, but under said vague definition the tea party fits the mold just fine. I'd include Tip O'Neill in there as well. Just because something is 'legal' or 'allowed' doesn't make it right or okay just as much as something being labeled 'illegal' doesn't make it wrong off hand.





Ibanezsam4 said:


> 2) this has only affected 28% of government workers. essentially panties are in a bundle over non-essential personnel being furloughed...
> 
> but i lose the ability to feel any deeper sympathies when i remember that because they are only furloughed, and not laid off, that these people will get back pay owed to them..... what. a. tragedy.



Shutdowns just shouldn't be allowed irrelevant to how devastating or not the affect is. Just because another party has suffered more or in the exact same manner doesn't mean mocking and not giving a shit is the correct course of action. As an example, there are kids in Africa who don't have school or any food so we should just not care about WIC, head-start, etc. programs because we have it a little better than these kids in Africa do. Making pivotal decision based on comparing tragedies is just bad politics. The media does as it wants so that is honestly irrelevant. 

While not the same this is why I can't stand libertarian-ism as an ideal (slight segue as it doesn't seem like you are a libertarian). The whole notion of I don't give a shit unless something directly affect me is not only a shitty position to hold in general, but illogical on a large scale. If EVERY individual was out for their own, cumulatively, the result is worse (prisoners dilemma) AND we'd have over 300 million different agendas since EVERYONE is out for their own. So nobody would be happy and our government would agree even less on what is the right thing to do.



Ibanezsam4 said:


> ...this is all about 2014 elections, this is not about people



Completely agree (hence why the republicans are doing this shutdown in the first place ).

Not sure what Ted Cruz's angle is though (he always has one) because he can't run for president. Running for our Governor may be on his plate since even if this turns sour for Republicans it won't here in Texas where Republicans seem to be worshiped unquestionably. 



Ibanezsam4 said:


> i will say this about the GOP though. whoever they hire as strategists should be fired.



Agreed except for the part about taking advantage of the shutdown as I personally don't think shutdowns by Congress (especially when they still get paid) should be allowed.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 3, 2013)

Obviously some people here have been brainwashed by the media into a false impression of the Tea party movement.
This is Tea Party country where I live, and I can tell you that they by and large are just hardworking people who don't except the gross expansion of the federal government. 

Raise taxes, spend more, raise taxes spend more, raise taxes spend more.
Great plan Democrats, that's really going to solve things lol.

Healthcare is nothing more than Obama's dividing tactic. It's a tool for them to turn our society into a class system. He was raised around communist and it certainly shows.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 3, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Obviously some people here have been brainwashed by the media into a false impression of the Tea party movement.
> This is Tea Party country where I live, and I can tell you that they by and large are just hardworking people who don't except the gross expansion of the federal government.
> 
> Raise taxes, spend more, raise taxes spend more, raise taxes spend more.
> ...



Such as but not limited to: His real father Frank Marshall Davis and Bill Ayers.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 3, 2013)

You're always full of rhetoric, yet rarely provide anything to back it up.

The Fed has (so far) grown less under Obama than it did under both Bushes, Clinton, or Reagan. (Source = The Growth Of Government: 1980 To 2012 - Forbes)

As for your tax claim, what kind of taxes are you talking about? Federal? State? If State, not all states are run by the same party, so in the case of State taxes, your whole point would be wash. If you instead meant Federal, you should take a look at the adjusted-for-inflation numbers:

U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1862-2013 (Nominal and Inflation-Adjusted Brackets) | Tax Foundation

The 4 lowest brackets have remained the same since the early 2000's. Only the top 3 brackets have increased in the last decade, and only by a couple of percentage points.


----------



## mcd (Oct 3, 2013)

hairychris said:


> I understand Libertarianism as a concept, but it should stay that way - a concept. It's as broken in real life as Communism is and for the same reasons: it absolutely ignores how human societies work in reality, and how such a system can be implemented..


 
I really don't think you understand Libertarianism. I do understand why it won't work in America, even though I am a card carrying Libertarian. 

It won't work in America because any politcal system that promotes self reliability and demotes government involvement will fail. We as a nation are to dependent on our Government to take care of us, and that's shameful. 

Most people also get there definition of Libertarian from a media skewed Tea Party. The Tea Party has done more to harm Libertarianism than promote it. 


hairychris said:


> *Old, rich, very white men.


 
comments like these are prepackaged blame person "x" for this problem. This IMHO ruins all credibility you could have had, finger pointing and blame should have stopped in grade school. 

I will say I agree to a point that we are a bank ran country, and our leaders pander to their masters...and a restructured banking system is a tenant of a lot of Libertarian ideals


----------



## ArkaneDemon (Oct 3, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Healthcare is nothing more than Obama's dividing tactic. It's a tool for them to turn our society into a class system. He was raised around communist and it certainly shows.



Holy .... I haven't posted anything on this forum in a while but I had to log in because this comment was so stupid that I couldn't stay away.

First of all Obamacare was basically drafted by private insurance companies and they're the ones who will benefit from it. PRIVATE insurance companies, that's the key word. 

And if you think that you don't live in a class system, you're deluded. There hasn't even been a classless system ever with the exception of maybe prehistoric man. But ever since slavery has existed, there has been class society. If you think otherwise, you're wrong, this isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of historical fact.

Like right now, the society that you live in is divided based on objective and subjective classes. The objective ones are two-fold (could be expanded to four but the other two are temporary classes and not separate from the original two) based on the relationship between individuals and capital (since you live under capitalism, as the entire ....ing planet does because it's a globalizes system): there's the ruling class (or whatever term you want to use, it doesn't matter to me), who are the business owners, those who extract profit from the work of others because they possess the machinery or tools to do so, and the working class, consisting of those who have to sell their labour time to those who own the machinery of production, whether it be production of goods or services.

Two classes, with diametrically opposed interests and goals. Then there's the subjective classes. Lower-middle-upper classes. Those don't really mean anything. Someone who is middle class is still more than likely to be a wage worker, and thus is working class. Someone might make very little money and be considered lower class, but have his own company employing others that he extracts profit from; he'd be considered a capitalist, albeit a pretty minor one.

So yeah, you live in class society, get over it. Obama isn't trying to create something that already exists, and even if he were, Obamacare or healthcare in general wouldn't do it. And seeing as you're one of those people who has his head shoved so far up the far-right's ideological ass, do your species and all of us a favour and I don't know maybe read a book or two about various things before you pull statements such as yours out of your ass.


----------



## Eric Von Kimble (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm military and things changed quick. Out Commisary is closed, most of the civilians were laid off so now we actually have to work.
NO food and we have to work, this sux. jk

But on a serious tip, it's unfortunate that because of congress lack of judgement and corporate greed and such that after the shutdown, politician are still getting paid for work they never did.
There is way to much campaigning just so they can stay in office longer. Besides that relying on a debt based system, we will never be able to pay our debts off anyway.

Expect more of this in the future maybe even worse.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 3, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Obviously some people here have been brainwashed by the media into a false impression of the Tea party movement.
> This is Tea Party country where I live, and I can tell you that they by and large are just hardworking people who don't except the gross expansion of the federal government.
> 
> Raise taxes, spend more, raise taxes spend more, raise taxes spend more.
> ...





I know quite a few tea party members and a lot of them are NOT hardworking (certainly not more so than any other individual). Actually the ones I know personally have their own personal safety net and are wealthy (some not of their own making). If you can get your big brother to bail you out and all you're concerned about is what affects you and yours then of course you are going to hold a position that is literally the most beneficial to only you (like tea party and libertarian-ism).

Brainwashing. The perfect term to diminish someone else's opinion. Man all those successful countries out their with a working national healthcare system and of course the only reason for Obama to attempt something similar is to divide this nation (admittedly thanks to 'compromise' the bill that passed isn't particular good). I think we as a nation do a good enough job dividing ourselves that we don't need much help.

Interestingly enough, historically speaking, taxes are low AND raising them to offset spending makes a hell of a lot more sense than increasing spending while lowering taxes (republican ideology).

Fascism, communism and conservatism are probably the 3 most misused words when discussing politics.



mcd said:


> It won't work in America because any politcal system that promotes self reliability and demotes government involvement will fail. We as a nation are to dependent on our Government to take care of us, and that's shameful.



Yeah screw disabled people and children, they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Can't eat? All well I'll make it to your funeral. Interestingly enough Reagan closing down federal mental health institutions is what led to the huge rise in homeless population. 

Don't get me wrong I do think some people take advantage, I do think certain areas of the government have gotten too big and I do think this country is run by banks and big business, but I still can't jump on to libertarian-ism. In reality a combination of many ideologies is going to work best for the US. It's the execution that is flawed.



mcd said:


> comments like these are prepackaged blame person "x" for this problem. This IMHO ruins all credibility you could have had, finger pointing and blame should have stopped in grade school.



I'd agree except the personal opinions of many of these individuals in the tea party, republicans and libertarians tend to be on the prejudicial side which makes it easy to question ones motives whether valid or not.




mcd said:


> I will say I agree to a point that we are a bank ran country, and our leaders pander to their masters...and a restructured banking system is a tenant of a lot of Libertarian ideals



We aren't a bank ran country we are a corporate AND bank ran country. Libertarian-ism doesn't take care of the corporate aspect at all.


----------



## leandroab (Oct 3, 2013)

GG, america!


----------



## mcd (Oct 3, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Yeah screw disabled people and children, they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Can't eat? All well I'll make it to your funeral.


 
not what i was getting at whatsoever. I will concede that some social programs when applied correctly could be beneficial to our country. However, a lot of them just perpetuate dependency on the US government. Me personal I would never want to be dependent on anyone but myself, it's a value I learned growing up dirt dirt dirt poor. My family never received assistance from the government, my parents worked their way out of poverty. 



flint757 said:


> I'd agree except the personal opinions of many of these individuals in the tea party, republicans and libertarians tend to be on the prejudicial side which makes it easy to question ones motives whether valid or not.



this is one of my biggest pet peeves. Libertarians are not in anyway shape or form Republicans, or Tea Party member...there is a perversion of what libertarianism is because of these whack jobs.






flint757 said:


> We aren't a bank ran country we are a corporate AND bank ran country. Libertarian-ism doesn't take care of the corporate aspect at all.



Unfortunately you're right, and the machine is to large to stop now.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 3, 2013)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Such as but not limited to: His real father Frank Marshall Davis and Bill Ayers.


 
 Precisely. They should've been hung in the street decades ago for treason. Well, BA should've gotten the firing squad while he was hanging, and MD should've just been deported.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 3, 2013)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Precisely. They should've been hung in the street decades ago for treason. Well, BA should've gotten the firing squad while he was hanging, and MD should've just been deported.



You are aware that Bill Ayers and his cronies were trained by the Cuban version of the KGB right [whatever Cuban's intelligence agency is called]? Should have been considered an act of war. Then we go and elect one of Bill's friends as president.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 3, 2013)

mcd said:


> not what i was getting at whatsoever. I will concede that some social programs when applied correctly could be beneficial to our country. However, a lot of them just perpetuate dependency on the US government. Me personal I would never want to be dependent on anyone but myself, it's a value I learned growing up dirt dirt dirt poor. My family never received assistance from the government, my parents worked their way out of poverty.
> 
> 
> 
> this is one of my biggest pet peeves. Libertarians are not in anyway shape or form Republicans, or Tea Party member...there is a perversion of what libertarianism is because of these whack jobs.



Fair enough.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 4, 2013)

mcd said:


> I really don't think you understand Libertarianism. I do understand why it won't work in America, even though I am a card carrying Libertarian.
> 
> It won't work in America because any politcal system that promotes self reliability and demotes government involvement will fail. We as a nation are to dependent on our Government to take care of us, and that's shameful.
> 
> Most people also get there definition of Libertarian from a media skewed Tea Party. The Tea Party has done more to harm Libertarianism than promote it.



I agree with your gist, however I have to make the difference between "libertarian" and "Libertarian". Tea Party are small-l and right-wing, the large-L party is more centrist IIRC.

In the case of the US, the small-l rightists are the "libertarians" with the political power, as per Tea Party. They are not what you would call "classical" libertarians... 

I probably should have been more clear with the distinction, but in this case the Libertarian Party has sod-all to do with the shutdown.



mcd said:


> comments like these are prepackaged blame person "x" for this problem. This IMHO ruins all credibility you could have had, finger pointing and blame should have stopped in grade school.
> 
> I will say I agree to a point that we are a bank ran country, and our leaders pander to their masters...and a restructured banking system is a tenant of a lot of Libertarian ideals



Again, re: with the distinction in mind, who are the backers of the Tea Party wing of the Repub party? Where did all of the birther bs come from?

I'll stand by the statement that the backers and benefactors of the Tea Party faction tend to be old, rich, white dudes...


----------



## synrgy (Oct 4, 2013)

Ayers? More bull shit. Are you guys on the Murdoch bankroll, or something?

snopes.com: Barack Obama and Bill Ayers

And don't give me this nonsense about how snopes is bogus because it happens to use sources, data, and facts to back up it's refutation of your preconceived ideas.


----------



## canuck brian (Oct 4, 2013)

I still find it hilarious that Federal level politicians worked their asses off to shut down the level of government they work for. It's like going to work in a factory and bombing it because you didn't get your way so you act like a spoiled crybaby.

They should have added a rider that suspended their pay while the government was shut down....ya know...like the rest of the people that they impacted. 

People are going to bitch about Obamacare / Affordable Health Care act, but its really strange how Obama was democratically elected twice and his law was deemed good by the Supreme Court after a legal challenge. With this in mind, the Tea Party Republicans, who have gone as far to call Republicans not on board with shitting the bed "Nazi Sympathizers", decided that they're going to do what Americans "want" and put an end to the democratically elected government.

If the shoe was on the other foot, the Tea Party Republicans would be calling for the public lynching of anyone not supporting them because they're un-American.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 4, 2013)

canuck brian said:


> I still find it hilarious that Federal level politicians worked their asses off to shut down the level of government they work for.



Well, if you're still getting paid it doesn't matter, n'est pas?


----------



## mcd (Oct 4, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Again, re: with the distinction in mind, who are the backers of the Tea Party wing of the Repub party? Where did all of the birther bs come from?
> 
> I'll stand by the statement that the backers and benefactors of the Tea Party faction tend to be old, rich, white dudes...



I get tired of the notion that Barry is some stand alone crusader against big money and old, rich, white dudes. I hear this more and more...News flash he is not Bought and Paid For: The Unholy Alliance Between Barack Obama and Wall Street: Charles Gasparino: 9781595230713: Amazon.com: Books

go ahead and give this a read, its the only one I know of that's free of rhetoric. Pretty good read too.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 4, 2013)

synrgy said:


> Ayers? More bull shit. Are you guys on the Murdoch bankroll, or something?
> 
> snopes.com: Barack Obama and Bill Ayers
> 
> And don't give me this nonsense about how snopes is bogus because it happens to use sources, data, and facts to back up it's refutation of your preconceived ideas.



Yeah... anyone that denies the health risks of Aspartame is ....ing bogus. Next.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 4, 2013)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Yeah... anyone that denies the health risks of Aspartame is ....ing bogus. Next.



Actually, no, it doesn't work that way.

I can say 4 + 4 = 8, then say that 4 + 5 = 100. The latter being incorrect does not in any way make the former incorrect.

*edit* not to mention, what they debunked was a direct link to cancer, brain tumors, and MS. They did not say there were no health risks.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 4, 2013)

synrgy said:


> Actually, no, it doesn't work that way.
> 
> I can say 4 + 4 = 8, then say that 4 + 5 = 100. The latter being incorrect does not in any way make the former incorrect.
> 
> *edit* not to mention, what they debunked was a direct link to cancer, brain tumors, and MS. They did not say there were no health risks.



You can trust whomever you like, but I will not. Snopes is a joke and they aren't worth my time.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 4, 2013)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You can trust whomever you like, but I will not. Snopes is a joke and they aren't worth my time.



Must be nice to rely solely on rhetorical evidence. They do say ignorance is bliss.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 4, 2013)

synrgy said:


> Must be nice to rely solely on rhetorical evidence. They do say ignorance is bliss.



You are aware that if Donald Rumsfeld wasn't appointed head of the FDA, Aspertame would've never been allowed by FDA to be used in food because of how it effected the monkey's it was tested on, right?


----------



## synrgy (Oct 4, 2013)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You are aware that if Donald Rumsfeld wasn't appointed head of the FDA, Aspertame would've never been allowed by FDA to be used in food because of how it effected the monkey's it was tested on, right?



You are aware that nobody said it didn't pose any health risks, right?


----------



## chinnybob (Oct 4, 2013)

I'm neither American or in any way clued up about politics, but from an economics point of view this _is_ rather alarming. For a generally accepted safe haven as massive as the US to default on it's debt would be huge, and I can't help but wonder whether anyone had even thought to stress test that scenario. If they hadn't then they most definitely are now! 

On the plus side, this is perfect material for my grad job applications


----------



## Church2224 (Oct 4, 2013)




----------



## rectifryer (Oct 5, 2013)

Isn't libertarian views focused on personal rights? How is this impractical? Personal rights always seem to be what suffers.


----------



## rectifryer (Oct 5, 2013)

mcd said:


> I really don't think you understand Libertarianism. I do understand why it won't work in America, even though I am a card carrying Libertarian.
> 
> It won't work in America because any politcal system that promotes self reliability and demotes government involvement will fail. We as a nation are to dependent on our Government to take care of us, and that's shameful.
> 
> ...


This x5billion. The tea party is the antagonist of personal freedom.


----------



## lurgar (Oct 6, 2013)

synrgy said:


> Must be nice to rely solely on rhetorical evidence. They do say ignorance is bliss.



Since the far right has a thing about trying to debunk anybody who disagrees with them, just try going to snopes, pulling the relevant links and studies out and using those instead.


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 7, 2013)

synrgy said:


> I think you may have mistook my post to be exclusive to the shutdown. I'm trying to speak more to the overall obstructionism that kicked in when Obama won his first term.




im not going to give you any room to wiggle in this one considering you probably agree with this statement wholeheartedly 

 

again your concept of history is framed only by your memory and your perception of events. translation: information travels so fast you know what everybody says in a matter of minutes. whereas in the past opposition party statements have always been this rhetorically heated (we used to allow duels) but news traveled slowly. this is the most wired political discussion has ever been.. but it doesn't make it new by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## estabon37 (Oct 7, 2013)

Ibanezsam4 said:


> whereas in the past opposition party statements have always been this rhetorically heated (we used to allow duels) but news traveled slowly. this is the most wired political discussion has ever been.. but it doesn't make it new by any stretch of the imagination.



I'm pretty sure this is the truest thing I've read on the internet in a long time. Nicely said.

The problem I have is that I'm pretty sure it's driving people away from politics in droves, myself included. It used to be easy to believe that politicians were kind of douchey, but did their jobs and kept things ticking over. The last couple of years suggest that they don't do their jobs (regardless of which government or even which country you look at), they were never the reason things kept ticking over (thousands of people who maintain government department jobs regardless of which party is voted in do that - but they're currently on hold in the US), and the massive amounts of rhetoric they spout is deliberately divisive and created as a means of fueling a 24 hour a day election cycle. The more time I spend looking at politics, the less I believe it achieves anything outside of starting or finishing wars.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 7, 2013)

Who said it was new? I'm just saying it's not okay, new or not.

*edit* I get that I said "which kicked in when Obama took office", but, honestly, did you _genuinely_ believe that I meant "for the first time ever", after we'd already well established in this thread that this is hardly the first time we've been in this situation?

I mean _recently_, and I thought the context of the thread inherently implied that. I'm sorry if it came across differently.

*edit #2* And you're just nit-picking, anyway. Do you even know what your point is? It kinda seems like you're arguing just for the sake of it..


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 7, 2013)

estabon37 said:


> I'm pretty sure this is the truest thing I've read on the internet in a long time. Nicely said.
> 
> The problem I have is that I'm pretty sure it's driving people away from politics in droves, myself included. It used to be easy to believe that politicians were kind of douchey, but did their jobs and kept things ticking over. The last couple of years suggest that they don't do their jobs (regardless of which government or even which country you look at), they were never the reason things kept ticking over (thousands of people who maintain government department jobs regardless of which party is voted in do that - but they're currently on hold in the US), and the massive amounts of rhetoric they spout is deliberately divisive and created as a means of fueling a 24 hour a day election cycle. The more time I spend looking at politics, the less I believe it achieves anything outside of starting or finishing wars.



there was a great quote i read in an editorial piece on how to be a good journalist. basically the author said in order to be a good journalist you need to realize that the political process has less to do with results and is more of a turf war between two parties which want the same powers but use different talking points. 

this whole debate frustrates me because there is so much hyperbole and 24-hour news sound bite quotes being thrown around and the media which supposedly is our fourth estate has not been holding anybody's feet to the fire


----------



## lawizeg (Oct 9, 2013)

So now many in the GOP are saying that a default wouldn't be that bad. 

SERIOUSLY? What are they basing that off of? I don't see the sense in what they're quoting in this article at all: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/u...-default-wouldnt-be-that-bad.html?hp#comments


----------



## hairychris (Oct 10, 2013)

lawizeg said:


> So now many in the GOP are saying that a default wouldn't be that bad.
> 
> SERIOUSLY? What are they basing that off of? I don't see the sense in what they're quoting in this article at all: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/u...-default-wouldnt-be-that-bad.html?hp#comments



Yeah, because if I tell my credit card company that I won't make this month's payment is going to go down so well.



Aaand the USA has fought (well, is fighting) 2 wars on tick. Good choice.


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 10, 2013)

lawizeg said:


> So now many in the GOP are saying that a default wouldn't be that bad.
> 
> SERIOUSLY? What are they basing that off of? I don't see the sense in what they're quoting in this article at all: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/u...-default-wouldnt-be-that-bad.html?hp#comments



so the idea behind this comes from a broad scope of history. every major empire that has existed (Rome is an awesome example) eventually runs out of money because the powers that be simply inflate the currency in order to print more and more, and eventually the debt builds up until you're the Weimar Republic and your money is worth nothing. 
when this happens default happens and there is so much unemployment and poverty that has occurred as a result of the money being worthless that the road to recovery is long, arduous, and you run the risk of the republic dissolving (in the case of the US we would probably break up into individual region states that kind of resemble this A Map of America's Future: Where Growth Will Be Over the Next Decade - Yahoo Finance 

The idea is if we default now it would blow hard ass chunks, but we wouldn't be as far gone as we would be say 20 years from now, it would halt all unnecessary foreign involvement, we would probably turn back to a domestic economy as imports would become too expensive (nobody could take ur jobs bur-de-doo!!!), huge government restructuring as the bureaucracy wouldn't be able to support itself, and all surplus would be used to pay off the debt (because we couldn't engage in global finance with a bad credit rating). 

there's a lot of good things that could come from our government defaulting, the biggest of which would be de-centralization, but it comes at he price of the next 10-15 years being difficult. but it will happen eventually, and the longer the inevitable is pushed off the harder the impact becomes. 

i'll just give you a great example right now, a lot of people see the economy starting to make a turn around, but in reality if the Fed stopped pumping billions into the stock market to float its numbers higher and encourage investment, we would see the last 3-4 years progress disappear overnight. scary thought.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 10, 2013)

That definitely isn't a new phenomenon (Germany and most of the world have had it happen at some point in history). That being said, our economy doesn't resemble any path that would lead to this happening. In fact many of the nations across the world who have had it happen are using the exact same or a similar economical system as we are today and obviously they are not all having the same problems they had in the past.

It's mentally deficient logic to say the least. Tea party has been saying this was on their agenda years ago though so I'm not surprised they'd say that.


----------



## lawizeg (Oct 10, 2013)

I dunno. In response to what Ibbysam said, I guess its the fact that the next 15 years would be difficult and the country would basically be ruined. Not because I'm super patriotic, I actually kind of hate a lot about the way America is, BUT I don't want to see people dying because their SS checks are cut off, and poverty and such skyrocketing because of the whole currency thing. That and people would probably jump ship to the UK or something.

Well, we have 7 days to see what happens.


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 10, 2013)

lawizeg said:


> Well, we have 7 days to see what happens.



actually thats incorrect, its seven days to vote on whether or not we increase our credit card limit. we have enough revenue to keep from defaulting on interest payments fro a little while longer. just another example of when Washington rhetoric doesn't actually match the situation on the ground


----------



## flint757 (Oct 10, 2013)

Frankly, if their goal is to destroy this country (to rebuild it from the ashes, how poetic ) there is no reason they shouldn't be arrested, impeached or fired. We shouldn't have to wait for an election cycle to get rid of these morons.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 10, 2013)

rectifryer said:


> This x5billion. The tea party is the antagonist of personal freedom.



Yea... Tell everyone in the rural parts of my state that... 

Here in VA this is just Obama trying to flex his muscle on us poor poor people...


----------



## hairychris (Oct 11, 2013)

Oh, to those people who negged me, sign your rep you pussies or I'll be forced to make up names for ya.

But as I'm a sunny & pleasant chap, I'll answer your nergs anyway:



hairychris said:


> Ahahahahaha, leftist? What world do you live in, exactly? Dems and Rebubs are both ultimately beholden to the mighty Dollar.
> 
> But then again you might be a tea-bagging libertarian. In which case, why do you hate America?





pigfelcher said:


> go .... yourself, when the country collapses you'll wish you had listened.



I have listened. That's the problem. The Tea Party wing of the Republican party have thrown their toys out of the pram over ACA, but I have a horrible suspicion that the _real_ reason that they are crying is that an uppity n....r is in the White House.

Yes, I went there.

Would all of the birther bullshit have happened if he was a white dude? Doubtful. Or calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama the Muslim if he wasn't brown? Doubtful.

I've watched the whole debacle that has happened since, what, 2008 with horrified fascination in the UK and US media, official and unoffical, from all sides. Dude, your political process is a trainwreck.

Add on to this the socially very conservative/fiscally very libertarian platform that the Tea Party runs on... Ugh. I can't work out whether the TP politicians are only sociopathic, or whether there's something much worse going on.

I don't particularly like Obama, btw, (drones, NSA, still to much big business sucking-up, stuff like that) but he seems mostly sane, at least.

I mean Michelle Bachmann. WHAT IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS UNHOLY IS THAT LUNATIC ON ABOUT, WHY DO PEOPLE LISTEN, *AND WHY THE .... WAS SHE VOTED IN TO ANY POSITION OF POWER??*

Not being of a religious bent, or a misogynist, but 1 Timothy 2:12 to you, Bachmann. For all of our sakes. Have you looked into her eyes when she speaks? Jesus.



hairychris said:


> So congressional staffers get no pay, their bosses do, and the NSA is still spying on the rest of us.
> 
> As a dirty foreigner (who happens to be in the world majority of non-USAians) I'd like to tell your government to go and .... itself.
> 
> Land of the Free? Land of the Hypocritical, more like.





twinkchaser said:


> Little too far.



Oh no, not at all. In fact I really don't think that I've gone far enough. The US/UK/Aussie/etc governments have colluded to spy on each other's citizens and pass interesting info over because it's illegal for them to spy on their own. Yes. I love the smell of freedom in the morning.

I also like the freedom to be stuck in jobs that don't pay a living wage because the American Dream.

Now, I like "America" as a concept, and whenever I've been I've had a great time and met great people. I don't like American exceptionalism in the slightest. 

We still have British exceptionalists, however we've already lost our empire so most sensible people just laugh at them (they're called UKIP, check them out sometime, they're hilarious).



hairychris said:


> Well, if you're still getting paid it doesn't matter, n'est pas?





grannysniffer said:


> Get out brit



Get out of where, exactly?

And I take it that you're not an Air Traffic Controller who is forced to work the shutdown without a paycheck.

Oh no, you obviously aren't one of those, you're probably just a kid who's masturbating over "Atlas Shrugged" because the nasty boys at school took your lunch money and you wish that you could go Galt on them*.

*Hey, if you'd signed your rep I'd have at least _attempted_ to be civil!



Anyway, why am I bothered by the situation as I am not a Yank? Simple. Being the world's largest economy when your politicians' tantrums disrupt things they affect *ME* (and everyone else in the world) too.

Grow up. and get your politicians to do so too.

</rant>


----------



## hairychris (Oct 11, 2013)

Ibanezsam4 said:


> actually thats incorrect, its seven days to vote on whether or not we increase our credit card limit. we have enough revenue to keep from defaulting on interest payments fro a little while longer. just another example of when Washington rhetoric doesn't actually match the situation on the ground



Kind of.

What will happen is that the government will either have to default on payments to creditors *or* make crash cuts to other services in order to be able to make them.

I mentioned above that fighting wars on credit isn't really a great way to do things. Maybe less of that nonsense would help.

As for your previous comment about defaulting being possibly an option now and not later:

Urgh. It would be a far better option to carry on, and actually have an adult conversation about how to deal with it in a sensible way. You know, like maybe stop dropping bombs on people and possibly raise taxes a bit?


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 11, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Urgh. It would be a far better option to carry on, and actually have an adult conversation about how to deal with it in a sensible way. You know, like maybe stop dropping bombs on people and possibly raise taxes a bit?



i completely agree on foreign spending, specifically the money we spend on aid to countries which 1) we don't benefit from and are merely continuing the post-colonial age 2) countries that don't need military aid to survive (Israel, they have more patents than anybody else when it comes to machinery used to take the life of a fellow human being, they dont need the help). 

But the taxes thing will always be a sticking point for me because of the personal wealth of congress. are there any poor people who work in congress? nope. ever notice that career politicians get richer while in congress? yup. whenever these cats talk about tax hikes, they write in breaks for themselves, or identify loopholes in the tax code (ever wondered why we have so many?) so they dont have to pay the excess. 
but they also tell their friends about it too. eventually it becomes a wealthy donor and executive club that never collects the revenue you want because the ones who promised to stick to the rich keep their fingers crossed behind their back because they will, under no circumstances, ever stick it to themselves. 

you're better off bringing the amount of unemployed back into the workforce, and solving the deep rooted issue of minority unemployment in the inner city so that there are more workers contributing income tax than expecting the super rich to solve a deficit problem. because frankly, working class and white collar people dont make enough money to be able to move their saving into tax free zones. and as a result you can always count on them to cough up.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 11, 2013)

Couple o' tings:

1) Foreign aid is relatively small compared to Military expenditure of >$600bn, and the largest chunk goes to Afghanistan (although Israel gets a chunk, it's still 0.5% of the total military spend). I do agree that giving Israel billions of dollars to buy tanks is a bit dubious.

Welfare is a much higher figure but at least is spent in making sure that people don't die. Could it be made more efficient - probably, but again an adult conversation needs to be had.

Sources for figures:

Military budget of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States foreign aid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Social programs in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) Taxation - I wasn't saying to _just_ tax the rich. Close loopholes, ditch the idea of corporate citizenhood & tax the corps more strongly (we have that problem in the UK too), maybe consider what to do with income taxes.

I agree with getting people to work, although for a living wage. We have also seen that trickle-down economics *does not work*. Injecting money into the bottom, into worker's pay (living wage), has a much greater effect then the retarded tax cuts for millionaires that Congress seems to love so much. The lower down the chain you are, the more of your wages you actually spend on products & services.

I also agree that the way the political system works encourages corruption, or rather the buying of politicians for special interests. However, IMO, the actual wealth of the politicians shouldn't matter when making the sums add up for the whole system... it's how they get their wealth that's the problem.

One of the comments that I was nerged over was mocking the fact that Congress get paid during the shutdown and other govt employees don't. If, say, they had their pay and expenses suspended automatically during a shutdown then it might 1) focus their attentions a bit more and 2) not make them look like the hypocritical wankers that they are. The Senate and Presidential offices should have their pay suspended too...


----------



## tedtan (Oct 11, 2013)

hairychris said:


> 2) Taxation - I wasn't saying to _just_ tax the rich. Close loopholes, ditch the idea of corporate citizenhood & tax the corps more strongly (we have that problem in the UK too), maybe consider what to do with income taxes.


 
I don't follow. How does ditching corporate personhood/citizenship boost the overall tax revenues collected or even the tax base? I'm not seeing a connection - what am I missing?



hairychris said:


> One of the comments that I was nerged over was mocking the fact that Congress get paid during the shutdown and other govt employees don't. If, say, they had their pay and expenses suspended automatically during a shutdown then it might 1) focus their attentions a bit more and 2) not make them look like the hypocritical wankers that they are. The Senate and Presidential offices should have their pay suspended too...


 
I'm not sure that suspending the politicians' pay would have any effect. Sure, doing so looks good on paper, but these folks are largely independently wealthy and tend make much more money from their investments than they receive in salary, so as a practical matter, I don't see this having much effect. 

The way I see politicians (of all parties) is as lying, cheating, stealing, selfish dogs whose' purpose is to get elected. As such, making the government's default on it's debt an impeachable offense such that anyone convicted of causing or contributing to this default would be permanently banned from public office would do more to stop the BS. granted, this isn't a perfect solution - it would be difficult to implement and time consuming to enforce, but at least it has some teeth.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 11, 2013)

tedtan said:


> I don't follow. How does ditching corporate personhood/citizenship boost the overall tax revenues collected or even the tax base? I'm not seeing a connection - what am I missing?



It'd be a good idea either way IMO. LLCs are just a bad idea. Raising corporate taxes, dividend taxes and capital gains taxes would be more of step in the right direction.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 11, 2013)

tedtan said:


> I don't follow. How does ditching corporate personhood/citizenship boost the overall tax revenues collected or even the tax base? I'm not seeing a connection - what am I missing?


 
Bit of a tangent but this gives corporations 1st Amendment rights to fund election campaigns, amongst other things.

One of the court cases: Buckley v. Valeo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's an older one but there's been back & forth on the issue since, including on spending limits, yadda yadda. I also just don't understand what justification there is to give a commercial entity those rights. 

I don't like lobbying, basically... It's a simple case of maths. A company can spend a few million supporting favoured politicians and have an expectation that they will make life easy on them. Tax law included. Corporate personhood makes this more difficult to stamp on.

Make sense?



tedtan said:


> I'm not sure that suspending the politicians' pay would have any effect. Sure, doing so looks good on paper, but these folks are largely independently wealthy and tend make much more money from their investments than they receive in salary, so as a practical matter, I don't see this having much effect.
> 
> The way I see politicians (of all parties) is as lying, cheating, stealing, selfish dogs whose' purpose is to get elected. As such, making the government's default on it's debt an impeachable offense such that anyone convicted of causing or contributing to this default would be permanently banned from public office would do more to stop the BS. granted, this isn't a perfect solution - it would be difficult to implement and time consuming to enforce, but at least it has some teeth.



I agree with you! In most other countries a failure like this would prompt a dissolution of government. What's happening now is just bullshit.

A note: If the Dems shut down government they'd be pricks too.


----------



## hairychris (Oct 11, 2013)

As a follow-up, it should also be illegal for politicians to vote on bills that they have a personal financial stake in, but it gets murkier about accepting money/post-government jobs from organizations that have benefitted from said pol's vote.

It might already be. In the UK there's a register of politicians interests but they're a bunch of dishonest ....s and not sure exactly how any restrictions work.

Grumble grumble.


----------



## tedtan (Oct 11, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Bit of a tangent but this gives corporations 1st Amendment rights to fund election campaigns, amongst other things.
> 
> One of the court cases: Buckley v. Valeo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...


 
I was thinking in terms of directly increasing the tax revenue when I read that, but I follow you now.

And you're right - as long as big business is paying for the politicians' campaigns, providing them jobs after they leave office, and otherwise skirting the anti-bribery laws in order to influence their vote, the politicians will be mere pawns in the service of their corporate masters rather than the real people who elected them.


----------



## Andrew91 (Oct 13, 2013)

hairychris said:


> As a follow-up, it should also be illegal for politicians to vote on bills that they have a personal financial stake in, but it gets murkier about accepting money/post-government jobs from organizations that have benefitted from said pol's vote.
> 
> It might already be. In the UK there's a register of politicians interests but they're a bunch of dishonest ....s and not sure exactly how any restrictions work.
> 
> Grumble grumble.



It's perfectly legal here for politicians to get paid to take a side on a bill from corporations that are affected. Basically, the US is controlled by bribery..
SURPRISE!
Not really, but


----------



## lawizeg (Oct 14, 2013)

Ibanezsam4 said:


> actually thats incorrect, its seven days to vote on whether or not we increase our credit card limit. we have enough revenue to keep from defaulting on interest payments fro a little while longer. just another example of when Washington rhetoric doesn't actually match the situation on the ground



Huh, thanks for the clarification. It can be a little difficult actually finding out whats going on


----------



## TheDeathOfMusic (Oct 14, 2013)

Long story short: the system is broken.


----------



## Watty (Oct 14, 2013)

More like the system sucks and PEOPLE are broken.


----------



## mcd (Oct 16, 2013)

Regardless of your opinion, this is NOT the time to be doing this.

House Republicans Schedule Obama Impeachment Hearings - The Daily Currant

"The Tea Party represents almost 22 percent of Americans." this terrifies me, I'm pretty anti- Reb or Dem....but the Tea Party having this much influence is scary.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 16, 2013)

I'm pretty sure him not being able to manipulate a large group of people is not grounds for impeachment.  He was also not the one to initiate this debacle. Compromise and extortion are not even kind of related.

Regardless the branches of government are meant to be separate. The president is not a part of the legislative branch. They are making a better case for impeaching themselves honestly.

What is really bizarre to me is that if 22% is an accurate number (I really hope it isn't) that still isn't 'most' Americans so why is it they think they have the right to decide what the other 78% want.


----------



## ferret (Oct 16, 2013)

That's a fake satirical site, not unlike the Onion, so, expressing opinions on it is somewhat silly.  But they sure caught everyone, cause I've seen it posted left and right on Facebook, etc.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 16, 2013)

Welp, the shutdown is over and the debt ceiling was raised. Crisis averted.

...Until next time.


----------



## XEN (Oct 17, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Welp, the shutdown is over and the debt ceiling was raised. Crisis averted.
> 
> ...Until next time.


Exactly.

I'm just glad to be back at work ...for now.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 17, 2013)

^Good to know... A lot of folks around here were pissed, confused and worried... The shut down actually never ended up affecting me somehow, but the office was definitely "tense"... During the past week or so...


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Oct 17, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Welp, the shutdown is over and the debt ceiling was raised. Crisis averted.
> 
> ...Until next time.



yup, same dog and pony show has already been scheduled for February... this is what happens when you have senate that votes on continuing resolutions instead of budgets... let the manipulation begin again!


----------



## Jakke (Oct 17, 2013)

I saw this, thought it was a lot of fun:


----------



## Andrew91 (Oct 17, 2013)

House Resolution 368 gave Majority Leader Eric Cantor the sole authority to re-open the government.. So that happened....


----------



## Watty (Oct 17, 2013)

OR HIS DESIGNEE. Can't forget that part....


----------



## Andrew91 (Oct 17, 2013)

I was surprised when I came home to the government being open once more so quickly after that.
Either way, .... the tea party.


----------



## Watty (Oct 17, 2013)

Yep, though it's kind of a situation where you have to blame the rest of the conservatives for giving "cover" to their extremism, much like in religion. It'll be interesting to see whether they embrace their new Cruzifix or whole heatedly denounce people like him...


----------



## Andrew91 (Oct 17, 2013)

Basically all republicans were, let's say.. _persuaded_ into going along with it.
This'll probably happen again in Feburary. Likely to be much more money and intimidation and open lunacy this time 'round.

Hopefully not... But in America? No amount of antics are surprising.. What do you expect when a majority of the population are bred to say YOLO?


----------



## flint757 (Oct 17, 2013)

What really blows for Texas is Cruz was elected in 2012 so we have to put up with him for quite a long time. .

Apparently the Houston Chronicle originally endorsed him for the election and they have officially un-endorsed him after all of this too. I wish Kay didn't retire. I didn't always agree with some of her more socially conservative leanings, but she at least had a level head.


----------



## Andrew91 (Oct 17, 2013)

How about we make the 5th of november... REALLY special... 

Wait.

I mean the... um.. 25th. how about that


----------



## tedtan (Oct 17, 2013)

^ Remember, remember the _twenty_fifth of November...


----------



## technomancer (Oct 25, 2013)

mcd said:


> Regardless of your opinion, this is NOT the time to be doing this.
> 
> House Republicans Schedule Obama Impeachment Hearings - The Daily Currant
> 
> "The Tea Party represents almost 22 percent of Americans." this terrifies me, I'm pretty anti- Reb or Dem....but the Tea Party having this much influence is scary.



FFS The Daily Currant is a SATIRE site


----------

