Government Shutdown

[Bodhisattva]

I'm sure we'll see some real ramifications from this shutdown.

Millions of US citizens are about to see some real nasty insurance rate hikes without replacing the ACA/Obamacare healthcare subsidies.

I for one am getting tired of the "make government so bad everyone wants it shutdown" crew and mantra. I want well running efficient government services like the Postal Service, Healthcare access, Social Security, etc., and a lot less of the cut everything 20% and watch the dominoes fall.

You mean I may not have to subsidize other people anymore? Oh, no!

There is no "make government so bad." It's government; it is bad. By definition. It's horrible and wasteful and destructive. Why would anyone tolerate any amount government other than the minimal, constitutionally justified amount?

Postal Service, Healthcare access, Social Security ... only one of those is constitutionally justifiable and they are all pathetic. Bastardizing the commerce clause and the taxing powers of government should not be the "kitchen drawer" for allowing the federal government to occupy trillions of dollars of our economy.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Which party has the most to lose or win in the event we have a prolonged shutdown? I'm afraid we're going to witness a high stakes game of chicken in the coming days.

Nobody, it'll be a wash.

It's always a wash, as I pointed out yesterday.

The media spin, of course, will be to wait until after the midterms and then tell us all how the shutdown caused it all. If the Republicans win, it'll be blamed on racism, like always. If the Democrats win, it'll be spun as the people making their voices heard blah blah blah.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I'll report to work in the morning, and if the government shuts down, we'll have our procedure to go through and then head home ...

We're still here. Staring at the wall. Even though government is shut down, we are waiting on the official word that the government is shut down. Government efficiency on display once again.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

We're still here. Staring at the wall. Even though government is shut down, we are waiting on the official word that the government is shut down. Government efficiency on display once again.

I was stationed at Little Rock AFB during the 1995-96 shutdowns. Of course, we got double the news dose given who was in the Oval Office at the time. But what I recall being so damned amusing was all of the fearmongering that went into it all, the whole, "We're gonna have to send our civilian workers home," and then not one civilian worker in the hospital actually went home.

Not. One. (And we didn't "really" need them, and I'm not saying that to be mean, they were my best friends, and I sang at one's daughter's wedding and later funeral years later).

Eventually, the "you gotta go home" trickled down to "well, we're gonna have to furlough you starting Monday," and the deal was reached on Friday, January 6, 1996, so nobody went home anyway.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I was stationed at Little Rock AFB during the 1995-96 shutdowns. Of course, we got double the news dose given who was in the Oval Office at the time. But what I recall being so damned amusing was all of the fearmongering that went into it all, the whole, "We're gonna have to send our civilian workers home," and then not one civilian worker in the hospital actually went home.

Not. One. (And we didn't "really" need them, and I'm not saying that to be mean, they were my best friends, and I sang at one's daughter's wedding and later funeral years later).

Eventually, the "you gotta go home" trickled down to "well, we're gonna have to furlough you starting Monday," and the deal was reached on Friday, January 6, 1996, so nobody went home anyway.

Sir, you obviously don't realize what a crisis this is. Without government, the moochiest among us will suffer fractionally. You monster!

 

[crimsonaudio]

Why would anyone tolerate any amount government other than the minimal, constitutionally justified amount?

For the life of me I'll never understand how, in some people's minds, a gaggle of politicians knows what's better for their life than they do...

 

[Bodhisattva]

For the life of me I'll never understand how, in some people's minds, a gaggle of politicians knows what's better for their life than they do...

And there are near-infinite examples. Social Security - the dumbest investment plan imaginable - is a sacred cow for the left.

Q: How about making it to get a return like a private investment so everyone can retire wealthy?
A: No! We can't trust the the markets! Only the government way is the good way!

Q: SS robs you of 40+ years of compounding returns and is going bankrupt. You're being suckered by deficit-spending politicians. How about a program that's not retarded?
A: I love SS!

Retarded it was. Retarded it continues to be.

 

[mdb-tpet]

You mean I may not have to subsidize other people anymore? Oh, no!

There is no "make government so bad." It's government; it is bad. By definition. It's horrible and wasteful and destructive. Why would anyone tolerate any amount government other than the minimal, constitutionally justified amount?

Postal Service, Healthcare access, Social Security ... only one of those is constitutionally justifiable and they are all pathetic. Bastardizing the commerce clause and the taxing powers of government should not be the "kitchen drawer" for allowing the federal government to occupy trillions of dollars of our economy.

There are plenty of good government services, that we all need, that we all use, and that we will always want. Road construction and maintenance (not listed in the Constitution), bridges (not listed in the Constitution), wireless spectrum (not listed in the Constitution), public health (not listed in the Constitution), policing (not listed in the Constitution), restaurant inspections (not listed in the Constitution), food inspections (not listed in the Constitution), air traffic control (not listed in the Constitution), anti-polluting policies (not listed in the Constitution), etc. NONE of these are specifically listed in the Constitution, but we ALL need these services.

Name all of the great countries that have weak, limited governments, then list all of the countries you want to visit and what kind of government they have. You'll find those two lists have very little in common.

 

[Bodhisattva]

There are plenty of good government services, that we all need, that we all use, and that we will always want. Road construction and maintenance (not listed in the Constitution), bridges (not listed in the Constitution), wireless spectrum (not listed in the Constitution), public health (not listed in the Constitution), policing (not listed in the Constitution), restaurant inspections (not listed in the Constitution), food inspections (not listed in the Constitution), air traffic control (not listed in the Constitution), anti-polluting policies (not listed in the Constitution), etc. NONE of these are specifically listed in the Constitution, but we ALL need these services.

Name all of the great countries that have weak, limited governments, then list all of the countries you want to visit and what kind of government they have. You'll find those two lists have very little in common.

If it's not a constitutionally-justified action (as originally written or amended), it should be left to the states.

 

[Its On A Slab]

There are plenty of good government services, that we all need, that we all use, and that we will always want. Road construction and maintenance (not listed in the Constitution), bridges (not listed in the Constitution), wireless spectrum (not listed in the Constitution), public health (not listed in the Constitution), policing (not listed in the Constitution), restaurant inspections (not listed in the Constitution), food inspections (not listed in the Constitution), air traffic control (not listed in the Constitution), anti-polluting policies (not listed in the Constitution), etc. NONE of these are specifically listed in the Constitution, but we ALL need these services.

Name all of the great countries that have weak, limited governments, then list all of the countries you want to visit and what kind of government they have. You'll find those two lists have very little in common.

Sprinkle libertarian magic dust on everything, and we have luxurious Somalia, where there is no government to muddle things up.

 

[Bodhisattva]

For the life of me I'll never understand how, in some people's minds, a gaggle of politicians knows what's better for their life than they do...

Ask Slab to justify this. Apparently, without government to deprive people of their freedom and trillions of dollars, we'll become Somalia. But, big government under the GOP ... Nazis! ... Or something. It doesn't have to make sense. It just has to be tribal.

 

[75thru79]

And there are near-infinite examples. Social Security - the dumbest investment plan imaginable - is a sacred cow for the left.

Q: How about making it to get a return like a private investment so everyone can retire wealthy?
A: No! We can't trust the the markets! Only the government way is the good way!

Q: SS robs you of 40+ years of compounding returns and is going bankrupt. You're being suckered by deficit-spending politicians. How about a program that's not retarded?
A: I love SS!

Retarded it was. Retarded it continues to be.

I'm not a huge fan of Social Security but to be fair it is not a retirement plan and was never intended to be. It was supposed to be a safety net for those that for whatever reason did not save enough for retirement. No one wanted to see seniors starving to death.

As is true in many instances, when you provide a safety net like this people eventually see it as not a safety net but actually retirement savings and then they make no effort to save anything on their own. The messaging from the government on SS is not good either. They insist on using terminology that depicts SS as some sort of retirement savings account when in reality it is anything but. It is simply a resource allocation tool that takes money from employers and employees and redistributes it to people that are deemed "retired".

We've gone way too far down the road with SS to pivot and privatize it. Let's say we decide to privatize it. We can only do that for new entrants in the job market. You can't do it from someone in their 50s because they have been "saving" for probably thirty years or so and there is NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT. There is no account with your money in it that they can just shift over to a Fidelity account. We would have to go further in debt to fund this mass transfer of money into a privatized government retirement account.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I'm not a huge fan of Social Security but to be fair it is not a retirement plan and was never intended to be. It was supposed to be a safety net for those that for whatever reason did not save enough for retirement. No one wanted to see seniors starving to death.

As is true in many instances, when you provide a safety net like this people eventually see it as not a safety net but actually retirement savings and then they make no effort to save anything on their own. The messaging from the government on SS is not good either. They insist on using terminology that depicts SS as some sort of retirement savings account when in reality it is anything but. It is simply a resource allocation tool that takes money from employers and employees and redistributes it to people that are deemed "retired".

We've gone way too far down the road with SS to pivot and privatize it. Let's say we decide to privatize it. We can only do that for new entrants in the job market. You can't do it from someone in their 50s because they have been "saving" for probably thirty years or so and there is NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT. There is no account with your money in it that they can just shift over to a Fidelity account. We would have to go further in debt to fund this mass transfer of money into a privatized government retirement account.

Many, many things wrong with SS. To start with, it's constitutionality is dubious at the federal level. If a state wants to have a horribly-run program, they can knock themselves out. But, the feds have time and time again shown their incompetence. Call it a retirement plan. Call it a safety net. What it is is an enormous failure, especially when considering it could be mirrored along the line of a near-infinite number of private plans. We could have every retiree spending their golden years being very comfortable if not millionaires and then being able to pass along what's left in their account to the next generation. Instead, we have no property rights to 12.4% of our income that is taken from us for 40+ years. That's criminal!

 

[JDCrimson]

I just wished all the people who hate SS would give up their share in meaningful protest to change the system...

And understand the circumstances under which the system was created and perpetuated. On the heels of the Great Depression which was largely contributed but the stock market crashes. Retirees broken down from farming or sweatshop manufacturing. Then the erosion of pensions with underperforming 401ks as the unfunded replacement for workers.

When was there a good time to design and transition to a new type plan without leaving out a whole generation of people?

 

[75thru79]

I just wished all the people who hate SS would give up their share in meaningful protest to change the system...

I would happily exit SS as soon as I get all the money back I paid in payroll taxes.

 

[JDCrimson]

But what if that aint part of the bargain?

People advocate means testing for receiving benefits. What if that means you?

I would happily exit SS as soon as I get all the money back I paid in payroll taxes.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I just wished all the people who hate SS would give up their share in meaningful protest to change the system...

And understand the circumstances under which the system was created and perpetuated. On the heels of the Great Depression which was largely contributed but the stock market crashes. Retirees broken down from farming or sweatshop manufacturing. Then the erosion of pensions with underperforming 401ks as the unfunded replacement for workers.

When was there a good time to design and transition to a new type plan without leaving out a whole generation of people?

I completely understand the circumstance of when it was created. You couldn't collect until years after average life expectancy. It was a poorly designed system at conception. And then they exponentially expanded who could lounge on the dole. So, it's been modified many, many times. Just never for the better. Not sure why the left is in love with such a pitiful program. They don't want people independent and wealthy. Poor and dependent is better. SMH.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I would happily exit SS as soon as I get all the money back I paid in payroll taxes.

Yep. I could take all my money and invest it in the market, getting double-digit returns for 35 years and counting. I'd have millions of more dollars than I have now.

 

[Bodhisattva]

But what if that aint part of the bargain?

People advocate means testing for receiving benefits. What if that means you?

I don't advocate for means testing. I'm not entitled to anyone else's money. No one is entitled to mine. That's government-sanctioned theft.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I wish SS were designed like a 529. It's idiot-proof. Lan only put $100/paycheck into Lily's 529 when Lily was born. Now there's enough money in there to cover her room and board (Tuition and fees are covered by scholarship.) for her entire undergrad years + enough to cover a good chunk of graduate school. Easiest thing in the world. (We could have put more into the 529. but we didn't want to give her a free ride for grad school out of concern that should wouldn't value money like she should.)