Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Freeborn126 on April 03, 2011, 05:56:06 PM
-
Is that really a bad thing? Wouldn't we save a bunch of money? The states and local goverments can take care of themselves just fine.
-
The govt should be closed 99 percent of the time.
-
Honestly, if they just convened every six months or so we would be fine. If government runs all the time they have to create more and more b.s. laws and huge agencies in order to justify their existence. Government cannot leave anything alone.
-
Maybe then people will see that life still exists without uncle sam holding their hand, and will learn to figure things out for themself.
-
does that mean we can be 'late' with our 4/15 filling?
govt shuts down; no postal delivery?
-
Hey no postal delivery means none of those dam bills. lol
-
Hey no postal delivery means none of those dam bills. lol
shut 'er down !
-
LOL!
-
How many people does the federal government employ?
-
How many people does the federal government employ?
Far too many.
-
Far too many.
We agree. But, how many?
-
We agree. But, how many?
We've Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers
More Americans work for the government than in manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined.
By STEPHEN MOORE
If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.
It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?
Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees—twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida's ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York's.
Even Michigan, at one time the auto capital of the world, and Pennsylvania, once the steel capital, have more government bureaucrats than people making things. The leaders in government hiring are Wyoming and New Mexico, which have hired more than six government workers for every manufacturing worker.
Now it is certainly true that many states have not typically been home to traditional manufacturing operations. Iowa and Nebraska are farm states, for example. But in those states, there are at least five times more government workers than farmers. West Virginia is the mining capital of the world, yet it has at least three times more government workers than miners. New York is the financial capital of the world—at least for now. That sector employs roughly 670,000 New Yorkers. That's less than half of the state's 1.48 million government employees.
Don't expect a reversal of this trend anytime soon. Surveys of college graduates are finding that more and more of our top minds want to work for the government. Why? Because in recent years only government agencies have been hiring, and because the offer of near lifetime security is highly valued in these times of economic turbulence. When 23-year-olds aren't willing to take career risks, we have a real problem on our hands. Sadly, we could end up with a generation of Americans who want to work at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
The employment trends described here are explained in part by hugely beneficial productivity improvements in such traditional industries as farming, manufacturing, financial services and telecommunications. These produce far more output per worker than in the past. The typical farmer, for example, is today at least three times more productive than in 1950.
Where are the productivity gains in government? Consider a core function of state and local governments: schools. Over the period 1970-2005, school spending per pupil, adjusted for inflation, doubled, while standardized achievement test scores were flat. Over roughly that same time period, public-school employment doubled per student, according to a study by researchers at the University of Washington. That is what economists call negative productivity.
But education is an industry where we measure performance backwards: We gauge school performance not by outputs, but by inputs. If quality falls, we say we didn't pay teachers enough or we need smaller class sizes or newer schools. If education had undergone the same productivity revolution that manufacturing has, we would have half as many educators, smaller school budgets, and higher graduation rates and test scores.
The same is true of almost all other government services. Mass transit spends more and more every year and yet a much smaller share of Americans use trains and buses today than in past decades. One way that private companies spur productivity is by firing underperforming employees and rewarding excellence. In government employment, tenure for teachers and near lifetime employment for other civil servants shields workers from this basic system of reward and punishment. It is a system that breeds mediocrity, which is what we've gotten.
Most reasonable steps to restrain public-sector employment costs are smothered by the unions. Study after study has shown that states and cities could shave 20% to 40% off the cost of many services—fire fighting, public transportation, garbage collection, administrative functions, even prison operations—through competitive contracting to private providers. But unions have blocked many of those efforts. Public employees maintain that they are underpaid relative to equally qualified private-sector workers, yet they are deathly afraid of competitive bidding for government services.
President Obama says we have to retool our economy to "win the future." The only way to do that is to grow the economy that makes things, not the sector that takes things.
Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704050204576219073867182108.html
-
Case closed.
-
So BF that includes state governments and city workers?
-
That's a good article BF posted and we really need to cut down the size. But, nobody wants a shut down.
Remember, the last time the gov't shutdown, all those employees received back pay for doing nothing. The only people who are going to work during the shutdown (and not get paid until later) will be emergency essential/mission critical, etc.
That means a lot of people will get a free vacation. Trim the fat - yes, shut it down - no.
-
So BF that includes state governments and city workers?
It looks like it includes state governments but city workers I'm not 100% on. I'm guessing it's accounting for those people, too.
-
It looks like it includes state governments but city workers I'm not 100% on. I'm guessing it's accounting for those people, too.
That's ficking crazy, I am sure it would take years to undo this.
-
More government workers would mean more people working to benefit the country etc, but SOME HOW the opposite is true. WOW.
-
What would happen is that all non essential federal government workers, such as National Park employees would automatically be out of work and would not get paid. Its not something that would be horrible but it would be best to avoid it , considering that it couldnt last for very long and the political parties would have to make a compromise anyway.
It would be a bad deal for everybody, and a government shutdown should be avoided. The Republicans should take the $30 billion cut deal.
-
Truly ludicrous how irresponsible obama is being in this.
-
Hey no postal delivery means none of those dam bills. lol
fact of the matter is you can never hold a good postman down...
-
How many people does the federal government employ?
From the net:
How many federal employees are there in the US?
At least 2,748,978.
There are 2,748,978 civilian federal employees in the United States as of January 2009. This is according to the Federal Employment Statistics published by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Employees with security agencies (CIA, NSA, etc) as well as the National Imagery and Mapping Agency are not included in this number. 97.6% of civilian federal employees work in the executive branch of government.
http://www.numberof.net/number-of-federal-employees-2/
-
I work for Netflix, and we obviously work with/through the postal service. I asked my boss what will happen with us if there is a shutdown and he couldn't answer. ??? :-\
-
Nothing bad will happen if the government shuts down.
The concept of a "shutdown" is a completely exaggerated ruse to galvanize support for the Democratic party.
Law enforcement will not shut down, essential services will not shut down, the military will not shut down, Jamal Watkins will still be able to pick up his welfare/ unemployment check. The reason why Osama and the dems are shook up over the possibility of a shutdown is because some of the meaningless bureaucrats in the Federal Government might be forced to take an unpaid vacation for a few days. Then, the Dems will blame the alleged "government shutdown" on harming the so called 'Economic Recovery' because the only jobs that were saved or created by the Osama administration are in the public sector.
-
More government workers would mean more people working to benefit the country etc, but SOME HOW the opposite is true. WOW.
Yeah but they want to get paid so you need enough taxes and that can only come from the private sector
-
I work for Netflix, and we obviously work with/through the postal service. I asked my boss what will happen with us if there is a shutdown and he couldn't answer. ??? :-\
that's why i've got 28 movies in the 'instant play' wifi queue.
-
that's why i've got 28 movies in the 'instant play' wifi queue.
Let me guess:
Brokeback Mountain
Snow White and 7 dwarfs
etc etc
-
Anarchist thread reported! :)
-
White House Orders Agencies To Prep For Government Shutdown
TPM ^ | April 5, 2011, 8:43AM | Brian Beutler |
It's not just the House of Representatives.
In another sign that neither side in the spending cut fight is confident that a government shutdown can be avoided, the White House has ordered federal agencies to prep for a government shutdown.
Ed O'Keefe at the Washington Post obtained the memo from a federal official, and confirmed its authenticity with the Office of Management and Budget.
"[G]iven the realities of the calendar, good management requires that we continue contingency planning for an orderly shutdown should the negotiations not be completed by" April 8, the memo reads. More guidance should be forthcoming today. The development occurs just as House leadership is distributing guidance members of Congress about shutdown protocol.
Congressional leaders will meet with President Obama at the White House Tuesday in a last-ditch effort break the logjam and reach a spending deal before the end of the week. If an agreement isn't reached, both sides are at the ready to blame the other for the shutdown.
-
Democrats don't like GOP plan to postpone shutdown
Sticking points in possible budget deal
Mon, Apr 4 2011
Related NewsRepublican budget plan envisions sharp cuts
WASHINGTON, April 5 | Tue Apr 5, 2011 9:21am EDT
WASHINGTON, April 5 (Reuters) - A Republican plan that would give negotiators another week to craft a budget deal and avoid a government shutdown is unacceptable to Democrats, a congressional aide said on Tuesday.
The proposal, released late Monday night, would fund the government on a temporary basis for one more week beyond Friday, when current funding runs out. It also would cut $12 billion from current levels.
(Reporting by Andy Sullivan; editing by Doina Chiacu)
-
Shut it down and ObamaCare is DONE. The GOP campaigned on getting rid of this abomination (or Obamanation, if you will). Now, they can do it, even without control of the Senate and White House, by taking the money from it and NEVER FUNDING IT, until Obama and his liberal buddies are GONE.
The Dems don't care about shutdown; they're just hoping the GOP gets blamed for it. But, from what I've seen, this won't be the case. Someone needs to tell Howard Dean (YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!) this ain't 1995.
-
OK so let me get this right, the Dems controlled House, Senate, POTUS and didn't pass a budget, Only resolutions to keep the government funded. So now after the loose the house, its the Reps fault that the government may "shutdown"? That makes about as much sense as killing some one in Afghanistan for someone burning a book in Florida
-
Cantor says White House increasing odds of shutdown
WASHINGTON, April 5 | Tue Apr 5, 2011 10:24am EDT
WASHINGTON, April 5 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama has increased the odds that the U.S. government will shut down when funding runs out on Friday by rejecting a Republican proposal that would have pushed the deadline back by one week, House Republican Leader Eric Cantor said on Tuesday.
"The White House now has increased the likelihood of a shutdown in just dismissing out of hand a vehicle that we have put forward to say, 'Look, we do not want a shutdown,'" Cantor told reporters after a meeting with fellow Republicans.
(Reporting by Thomas Ferraro; Editing by Doina Chiacu)
________________________ ________________________ _____
Obama is truly the most irresponsible POTUS of my lifetime.
-
you shut it down, and paul ryan's budget is overlooked - and it'll cut 400 bil per year, I believe. All the news will be "you elected the tea party, some of them actually said they'd shut down the govt, and now look, it's shut down!"
I mean, it never shut down under pelosi, did it? ???
Factually it's some bullshit, but that'll be what the average joe schmoe hears and thinks.
-
you shut it down, and paul ryan's budget is overlooked - and it'll cut 400 bil per year, I believe. All the news will be "you elected the tea party, some of them actually said they'd shut down the govt, and now look, it's shut down!"
I mean, it never shut down under pelosi, did it? ???
Factually it's some bullshit, but that'll be what the average joe schmoe hears and thinks.
::) ::) It did shut down during pelosi because she spent like there was no tommorow, never did a real budget, and put us in the mess along with Obama over the last two years.
Good job kneepadding though.
1.65 TRILLION DEFICIT and Bama the destroyer is threatening to shut the govt over a measily 60 billion in cuts. Only a person so beyond reality cant see who is as fault here.
-
Editorial: $4 Trillion In Cuts Is Just A Start
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568095/201104041921/Ryans-Hope.htm
Posted 04/04/2011 07:21 PM ET
View Enlarged Image
Budget: Republicans are set to unveil common-sense changes to entitlements that cut spending $4 trillion over the next decade and start to restore our fiscal health. Predictably, do-nothing Democrats call them "extremist."
But who's the real extremist here? The one who recognizes that $10 trillion-plus in expected deficits over the next 10 years is a serious problem? Or those who insist there's no budget problem so bad that more spending and a massive tax hike on all Americans can't fix it?
Truth is, our long-term fiscal problem is so severe that, absent immediate corrective action, our country's political and economic future is imperiled.
By the Social Security and Medicare Trustees' own estimates, we are running headlong into a fiscal tsunami. All told, the government's entitlement accountants say, we have roughly $107 trillion in unfunded liabilities — $340,836 and change for every American alive today.
Even if you're generous and reduce that by the amount of assets the government has, the future red ink at the end of the 2010 fiscal year was still about $57 trillion — $7 trillion for federal pensions, $17 trillion for Social Security, $22 trillion for Medicare, and about $11 trillion or so in debt. That's $481,000 for every U.S. household.
For Democrats to refuse to cut spending in the face of such numbers is the definition of "extremist."
The fiscal cancer is growing fast. As the chart shows, based on estimates from the Government Accountability Office, spending on entitlements and interest on our debts will soar from just 11% of GDP this year to over half of our economy by 2065.
That means that, in that year, children born today will see 50 cents of every dollar they earn turned over to the government to pay for retirees' benefits. As intolerable as that is, today's Democrats have chosen to ignore it, screaming instead about "Wall Street" bailouts and "taxing the rich."
Unfortunately, the Democrats' panacea of higher taxes will sink the economy. Just to pay for Social Security and Medicare would require a near tripling of the current tax rate of 15.3% by the middle of the century.
Americans would be slowly bankrupted by such policies — and so would the government.
In that context, House Budget Committee chief Paul Ryan proposes $4 trillion in cuts. Extreme? Even if he cut $6 trillion, our national debt would still rise. Faced with $10 trillion in deficits, $4 trillion is just a modest start. Now we'll see who the real extremists are.
-
Good job kneepadding though.
Please remove trump's cawk from your ear - I specifically said it was some bullshit, but that it's very possible the blame will be put upon repubs:
Factually it's some bullshit, but that'll be what the average joe schmoe hears and thinks.
You never heard prominent dems calling for a govt shutdown during the election season. I remember hearing it from tea party camp though. Statements like that will help obama in 2012.
-
Please remove trump's cawk from your ear - I specifically said it was some bullshit, but that it's very possible the blame will be put upon repubs:
You never heard prominent dems calling for a govt shutdown during the election season. I remember hearing it from tea party camp though. Statements like that will help obama in 2012.
Thats because they lov the fucking govt and want to spend until we are broke beyond repir
________________________ _______
But who's the real extremist here? The one who recognizes that $10 trillion-plus in expected deficits over the next 10 years is a serious problem? Or those who insist there's no budget problem so bad that more spending and a massive tax hike on all Americans can't fix it?
240 - do you agree with that?
-
obviously the spending is BS. Obviously the dems WANT the shutdown so nobody hears about the new repub budget propsal cutting medicare, etc.
Sweet jeebus, I had no idea we were actually debating that - everyone knows that homie.
But I'm talking about the PERCEPTION. The political angles boths sides will take. The repubs passed a "don't shut down the govt" bill this week - it was actually called that - which is totally window dressing. And the dems want to paint tea party repubs as nutbags intent on destroying the govt.
-
If Obama can run a $1-2 trillion deficit every year, his chances of propping up the economy and avoiding a complete meltdown go up. If he had to run a balanced budget, it would be hilarious to watch the Dems struggle to choose where to cut. A balanced budget amendment to the constitution would be a no-brainer to most people.
-
How many people does the federal government employ?
Federal workers in shutdown limbo
The stakes are high. If lawmakers fail to pass some kind of spending bill by the end of Friday, hundreds of thousands of government employees are likely to be furloughed, and their paychecks stopped.
In already tough economic times, "One or two missing paychecks could spell disaster for these families," Dougan said.
Just who are these workers? According to government data, average employees are likely to be in their mid-40s.
They work in management, business or financial positions at the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs or Homeland Security.
They tend to have graduated from college, live outside of Washington and are white. They make around $74,000 a year.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/04/news/economy/federal_workers_shutdown/index.htm?cnn=yes&hpt=Sbin
Let me get this straight, many of these government employees make around $74,000 a year and they say that "one or two missing paychecks could spell disaster"? Can't they save up one to two months worth of expenses to prepare for such things? ::)
-
If Obama can run a $1-2 trillion deficit every year, his chances of propping up the economy and avoiding a complete meltdown go up. If he had to run a balanced budget, it would be hilarious to watch the Dems struggle to choose where to cut. A balanced budget amendment to the constitution would be a no-brainer to most people.
why would Repubs not want to avoid a complete meltdown
Cheney allegedly said: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter"
Seems like deficits only matter when the Dems are in the White House but surely if there was any valid reason to run a deficit it would be to avoid a "complete meltdown"
-
Straw - its all a matter os scale. And Cheney was dead wrong on the deficit issue.
Do you have any clue how bad we are finances wise?
and Straw - please tell me why Obama abandoned the recomendations of the debt commission?
-
Straw - its all a matter os scale. And Cheney was dead wrong on the deficit issue.
Do you have any clue how bad we are finances wise?
and Straw - please tell me why Obama abandoned the recomendations of the debt commission?
I'm talking about Repubs sudden interests in the deficit after not giving a shit and even reveling in it for 20+ years
There is no doubt it needs to be addressed but at the same time we're in the beginning stages of a recovery (with a long way to go) and to just slash and burn indiscriminately will make things worse
The problem is that Repubs and Dems (and mostly Repubs in my opinion) can't get past their ideological biases. I want to see both sides put some skin in the game
-
Its all in relaton to GDP. We are at almost WW2 levels.
-
Let me guess:
Brokeback Mountain
Snow White and 7 dwarfs
etc etc
and both got 5 out of 5 stars!
-
Its all in relaton to GDP. We are at almost WW2 levels.
well we have been at war in Iraq, Afghanistan longer than WWII and Obama budget includes not only those costs but also the costs of the Bush Tax Cuts along with whatever they've spent (and 40% of this was more tax cuts) to try to keep the our economy from cratering
my issue is with the current batch of Repubs (many who have been in office for years) who are now suddenly deficit hawks.
-
why would Repubs not want to avoid a complete meltdown
Cheney allegedly said: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter"
Seems like deficits only matter when the Dems are in the White House but surely if there was any valid reason to run a deficit it would be to avoid a "complete meltdown"
The problem with continuing to borrow to fix the economy is that it guarantees a meltdown in the future. Our best hope is to make cuts immediately and then drastically cut spending going forward. We need to gradually ween this nation of freeloaders off the government teet. Obama kicking the can down the road is a complete failure, any administration can do that.
-
The problem with continuing to borrow to fix the economy is that it guarantees a meltdown in the future. Our best hope is to make cuts immediately and then drastically cut spending going forward. We need to gradually ween this nation of freeloaders off the government teet. Obama kicking the can down the road is a complete failure, any administration can do that.
There is this guy at the gym who is a huge obama supporter I often talk to. Former Wall Street guy. He is a typical guilt ridden white lib yupie type. But we can talk. The one thing this guy still cant get over is the fact that obama walked away from his own deficit commission recommendations, which we both agreed were tame in relation to the problems.
Can anyone please explain to me why obama tossed Simpson/Bowles in the trash?
-
There is this guy at the gym who is a huge obama supporter I often talk to. Former Wall Street guy. He is a typical guilt ridden white lib yupie type. But we can talk. The one thing this guy still cant get over is the fact that obama walked away from his own deficit commission recommendations, which we both agreed were tame in relation to the problems.
Can anyone please explain to me why obama tossed Simpson/Bowles in the trash?
Good question. It looked like a plan that both parties could support. What is comes down to is that Obama was never serious about cutting the spending. He wants to be all things to all people, so he appointed the commission, but he also wants to appeal to the crowd waiting for their handouts. Can't have it both ways.
-
The problem with continuing to borrow to fix the economy is that it guarantees a meltdown in the future. Our best hope is to make cuts immediately and then drastically cut spending going forward. We need to gradually ween this nation of freeloaders off the government teet. Obama kicking the can down the road is a complete failure, any administration can do that.
many Eurozone economies took the austerity approach and the result in many cases has been economic contraction (the exact thing that we don't want right now). The UK is one such example
no doubt we've got a lot of challenges but we've also got to find a way to keep the economic recovery on track
I don't know of any easy answers
-
There are no easy answers. its either take the tough medicine now and deal reality, or kick the can down the road and face an even worse disaster. Its basic math.
-
many Eurozone economies took the austerity approach and the result in many cases has been economic contraction (the exact thing that we don't want right now). The UK is one such example
no doubt we've got a lot of challenges but we've also got to find a way to keep the economic recovery on track
I don't know of any easy answers
There are no easy answers. There is pain involved with making cuts. As far as economic contraction, have you ever heard Coach Parcells famous quote "you are what your record says you are"? We have to accept what we are and operate within our means.
-
There are no easy answers. There is pain involved with making cuts. As far as economic contraction, have you ever heard Coach Parcells famous quote "you are what your record says you are"? We have to accept what we are and operate within our means.
there are two parts to the equation - spending and revenue
we can also increase taxes and take away tax credits (or give them to other industries who are creating new jobs)
-
there are two parts to the equation - spending and revenue
we can also increase taxes and take away tax credits (or give them to other industries who are creating new jobs)
Increasing taxes will not even come close to closing the gap we face.
-
LOL @ the bush tax cuts getting extended. We were soooooooo worried about what would happen if we didn't spend that trillion to keep the rich people happy.
Fucking tools.
-
there are two parts to the equation - spending and revenue
we can also increase taxes and take away tax credits (or give them to other industries who are creating new jobs)
What if we didn't have a massive government to support? If we reduced government down to it's constitutional obligation, we would be well on our way to getting out of this hole.
-
Increasing taxes will not even come close to closing the gap we face.
never said it would
there are two sides the equation and we should do both
-
::)
There is no economic recovery. The impending government shutdown was a strategic plan by the Democratic party on the heels of a midterm election to basically pass the buck back to the GOP. What some of you fail to realize is that the budget was supposed to have been passed months ago by Pelosi and company. Instead, Pelosi and the rest of plague deliberately balked on submitting a budget precisely so that they could blame the GOP for spending cuts and/ or a government shutdown. These idiots think its 94-95 all over again. It isn't.
The only thing that Paul Ryan's budget does is put spending back at 2008 levels; hardly a herculean feat. Now we have the left with its usual, tired, grossly inaccurate and wildly absurd class warfare talking points about Paul Ryan tossing grandma out of a moving van into the river wearing cement shoes and going on taxpayer funded cruises with the Grand Wizard of the KKK and the CEO of BP. Its complete and utter nonsense.
And again, as I said earlier, this "shutdown" is not really a shutdown anyway.
-
::)
There is no economic recovery. The impending government shutdown was a strategic plan by the Democratic party on the heels of a midterm election to basically pass the buck back to the GOP. What some of you fail to realize is that the budget was supposed to have been passed months ago by Pelosi and company. Instead, Pelosi and the rest of plague deliberately balked on submitting a budget precisely so that they could blame the GOP for spending cuts and/ or a government shutdown. These idiots think its 94-95 all over again. It isn't.
The only thing that Paul Ryan's budget does is put spending back at 2008 levels; hardly a herculean feat. Now we have the left with its usual, tired, grossly inaccurate and wildly absurd class warfare talking points about Paul Ryan tossing grandma out of a moving van into the river wearing cement shoes and going on taxpayer funded cruises with the Grand Wizard of the KKK and the CEO of BP. Its complete and utter nonsense.
And again, as I said earlier, this "shutdown" is not really a shutdown anyway.
LMAO
-
Unions slam Obama for withholding shutdown plans
Hotair ^ | April 5, 2011
“Federal employees are being held hostage because these plans are not being made available,” said William R. Dougan, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, whose members include civilian Defense Department workers. “It’s disrespectful to hold these folks in limbo until the last minute.”
He called “inexcusable” the government’s decision not to tell federal workers who would be sent home and who would be told to keep working.
It was some of the strongest rhetoric that federal unions have used against a White House that has generally had the support of government unions. As a shutdown has loomed for weeks, with the clock running out at midnight Friday, the Office of Management and Budget has ordered federal agencies to remain mum on details.
Read the Article
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
-
I'm talking about Repubs sudden interests in the deficit after not giving a shit and even reveling in it for 20+ years
There is no doubt it needs to be addressed but at the same time we're in the beginning stages of a recovery (with a long way to go) and to just slash and burn indiscriminately will make things worse
The problem is that Repubs and Dems (and mostly Repubs in my opinion) can't get past their ideological biases. I want to see both sides put some skin in the game
Youre not serious are you? Deficits under REagan and Bush were not at these current levels. Deficits are not a problem if they are kept within reason. These current deficits are not within reason. Also, Reagan actually grew the economy while deficits increased. Obama has not grown the economy at all.
-
Youre not serious are you? Deficits under REagan and Bush were not at these current levels. Deficits are not a problem if they are kept within reason. These current deficits are not within reason. Also, Reagan actually grew the economy while deficits increased. Obama has not grown the economy at all.
norm wants to know what the deficits was like under 8 years of clinton?compared to that of bush/reagon with inflation adjustment included..
-
norm wants to know what the deficits was like under 8 years of clinton?compared to that of bush/reagon with inflation adjustment included..
Clinton / Newt was the most fiscally responsible duo in my memory.
-
Government Contractors Brace for Shutdown (Obama may use SS tax revenues to pay shutdown costs)
The Wall Street Journal ^ | 2011-04-04 | Elizabeth Williamson
U.S. businesses are bracing for layoffs and disruptions along their supply chains if the federal government shuts down later this week because of an impasse over the federal budget.
(snip)
Especially hard hit are small and midsized businesses that rely on steady flows of revenue from federal contracts to provide a wide array of products and services such as information technology consulting, building construction and maintenance, or food service at national parks.
(snip)
Should the government close, the Treasury could provide a several-hundred billion dollar cushion by borrowing from Social Security, federal pensions and other funds, says Gary Hufbauer, a former Treasury official who is senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
All because POTUS Madoff refuses to cut any spending. What a friggin joke this asshole is.
-
Federal Workers Union Sues White House Over Possible Government Shutdown
Fox News ^ | 4/5/2011 | fox news
With time running out for congressional leaders to reach a budget deal, the country's biggest federal workers union is taking the Obama administration to court for what it called a failure to explain how federal programs and services would be affected if there's a government shutdown.
The American Federation of Government Employees announced Tuesday that it filed a lawsuit in federal court last week seeking details on the shutdown plans of federal agencies.
The union's national president, John Gage, said he filed the lawsuit after the White House Office of Management and Budget failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request sent early last month.
Gage said public unions have been given very little information on how agencies would determine which employees are essential in the event of a government shutdown.
"It's not something that should be cavalierly handled," Gage said in a written statement. "If a shutdown goes on, there will be federal employees who are going to be hurt financially. They should know before the eve of a shutdown what is happening and it should be done orderly and not in a last-minute rush."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Failure to explain?
::)
-
Obama headed out of D.C. as shutdown looms
Washington Post ^ | 4/6/2011 | Perry Bacon Jr
________________________ ________________________ _--
A fiery President Obama insisted Tuesday that if he and congressional leaders couldn’t reach a deal to avert a government shutdown, “I want a meeting again tomorrow here at the White House.”
“I will invite the same folks that we invited today,” he added. “And if that doesn’t work, we’ll invite them again the day after that. And I will have my entire team available to work through the details of getting a deal done.”
Obama’s team may not include the president himself. Despite the impasse in Washington over federal spending, the president as of early Wednesday was scheduled to give two speeches outside of Washington: one on energy in the Philadelphia suburbs, then another Wednesday evening to a group of black political activists in New York.
If the schedule remains intact, it will be the president’s first trip outside the capital since he officially declared Monday he will seek a second term. And while Obama (D) and his aides have repeated said he will not focus on his campaign in the next few months, his schedule may contradict those words.
Obama’s town hall on energy will be held at a wind turbine plant in the town of Fairless Hills in Bucks County, a well-known political bellwether in the Philadelphia area. While the city of Philadelphia overwhelmingly votes Democratic, its suburbs swing between the Democratic and Republican parties, making them crucial for Obama’s 2012 campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
________________________ _____________-
Imagine President Bachmann/Palin/Trump/Paul going to Idahoe to speak to "white political activists" ? ? ?
-
-
Government shutdown could idle 800,000 workers: official
REUTERS ^ | 04/06/2011 | Matt Spetalnick
Reuters) - Around 800,000 workers could be idled and activities ranging from processing of tax filings and Small Business Administration loans could be suspended if the U.S. government is forced to shut down in a budget deadlock, a senior U.S. official said on Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
________________________ ________________________ ____
YES!
-
what about older people on social security..they wont be getting their checks..that will be fucked up
-
people who already get their ss check will get it. people trying to enroll wont be able to though
-
what about older people on social security..they wont be getting their checks..that will be fucked up
Tough shit - we are broke. Time to get real about our finances and end the ponzi scheme we have. Most seniors at this point are welfare cases as it is and collecting far more than they ever paid paid in, inflation, interest, adjusted.
-
Tough shit - we are broke. Time to get real about our finances and end the ponzi scheme we have. Most seniors at this point are welfare cases as it is and collecting far more than they ever paid paid in, inflation, interest, adjusted.
why. they worked for that money. Put into it. Some I know are barely making it..One served our country for 2 wars..He deserves it
-
so old people who worked 40 years and are turning 66 and signing up -
they don't deserve social security.
But
According to Paul Ryan, corporations should be paying 25% INSTEAD of 35%. He wants to slash grandma so AIG can pay less in taxes.
That's freaking rich.
-
so old people who worked 40 years and are turning 66 and signing up -
they don't deserve social security.
But
According to Paul Ryan, corporations should be paying 25% INSTEAD of 35%. He wants to slash grandma so AIG can pay less in taxes.
That's freaking rich.
Again - Basic Math!
-
why. they worked for that money. Put into it. Some I know are barely making it..One served our country for 2 wars..He deserves it
tough titties
he's just going to have to tighten his belt until corporations and the uber rich can finally get a fair deal from the government
-
::) ::)
If you paid in say 75k over a lifetime and "retire", at 65 y/o and die at 85 y/o and collect $1500 a month. Do the freaking math. that is madoff to a tee.
-
tough titties, Seriously..WTF
Sorry, he deserves all he gets from Social. He didn't even sign up for his social security until he was 71, when he retired from General Dynamics.
-
tough titties, Seriously..WTF
Sorry, he deserves all he gets from Social. He didn't even sign up for his social security until he was 71, when he retired from General Dynamics.
If you paid in 75k over a lifetime and start collecting at 65 y/o at 1500 a month. Do the math. this is madoff to a tee. its the definition of a ponzi scheme almost verbatum
-
Paul ryan would prefer give GE another 10% off their tax rate, than gie your 71 year old dad the chance to sign up for social security, thanks to the shutdown.
oh, and he's gonna cut the hell out of the medical treatment your pops will get too. *
*Most repubs are running fast from Ryan's slashing of medicare - nobody wants to support it on camera... can u blame them?
-
tough titties, Seriously..WTF
Sorry, he deserves all he gets from Social. He didn't even sign up for his social security until he was 71, when he retired from General Dynamics.
join me on the sarcasm slide
-
Paul ryan would prefer give GE another 10% off their tax rate, than gie your 71 year old dad the chance to sign up for social security, thanks to the shutdown.
oh, and he's gonna cut the hell out of the medical treatment your pops will get too. *
*Most repubs are running fast from Ryan's slashing of medicare - nobody wants to support it on camera... can u blame them?
::) ::) ::)
Off yourself.
-
::) ::) ::)
Off yourself.
owned
-
My dad is 68 and works full time with no interest in retiring, he gets a nice check monthly from his almost 30 years of naval career...He doesn't collect social security. This is just a friend of the family..drives me crazy, he may not get what is DUE to him.
-
join me on the sarcasm slide
I wasn't sure. I thought, wow that don't seem like Strawman
-
My dad is 68 and works full time with no interest in retiring...He doesn't collect social security. This is just a friend of the family..drives me crazy, he may not get what is DUE to him.
Some get screwed, most collect more more in excess than they ever paid in. SS is the classic ponzi scheme by definition. Even the trusttee of of SS admitted to Peter Schiff its a madoff scheme!
-
If you paid in 75k over a lifetime and start collecting at 65 y/o at 1500 a month. Do the math. this is madoff to a tee. its the definition of a ponzi scheme almost verbatum
you're forgetting the the employer pays in as well and the social security trust fund earns interest
this is not just a system where you get out what you pay in but rather a form of insurance
there are people who take out more than they pay in and vice versa
-
Some get screwed, most collect more more in excess than they ever paid in. SS is the classic ponzi scheme by definition. Even the trusttee of of SS admitted to Peter Schiff its a madoff scheme!
I don't suppose you actually have a source for this claim
-
I don't suppose you actually have a source for this claim
The Trustee of SS himself.
-
Social Security is unconstitutional, bottom line. LBJ's great society is a disaster, yet another example of government trying to do too much and making things worse. Where in it does the government get the authority to steal young people's money and give it to old people? Social Security should be voluntary.
They have been stealing money from me for years now and giving it to some lazy ass baby boomer who wants to retire at 65. I am not going to get any of that shit back. Why won't the government leave me alone and let me save up my own money for retirement?
-
The Trustee of SS himself.
I'm not watching a 19 minute video
tell me what point in the video that claim is made and hopefully the person making the claim also states where he got the information
-
The whole interview is well worth listening to. Schiff interviews the trustee of SS and says its no different than a ponzi scheme but for intent and thast the only thing propping it up is the ability of the govt to keep taxing people.
-
The whole interview is well worth listening to. Schiff interviews the trustee of SS and says its no different than a ponzi scheme but for intent and thast the only thing propping it up is the ability of the govt to keep taxing people.
As i pointed out, the whole government is a ponzi scheme by this same rational. What you are forgetting is the key word - intent. The question isn't what cuts can we make, but what can we do to grow our revenue to make up the short fall.
Cutting does nothing but harm every single American who paid in over his/her lifetime. What needs to happen is a growth in revenue for the government, something that doesn't happen by cutting taxes to the rich.
-
so old people who worked 40 years and are turning 66 and signing up -
they don't deserve social security.
But
According to Paul Ryan, corporations should be paying 25% INSTEAD of 35%. He wants to slash grandma so AIG can pay less in taxes.
That's freaking rich.
Maybe you ask why SS money is in the general fund? Oh that's right LBJ and his fucking great society ::) You appear to me the type of person that only looks at the headline and doesn't want to look at why things are fucked in the first place. So instead of bitching about a tax structure that is at least fucking competetive with the rest of the world, pull out the same bullshit that has been used over and over its the kids and the old people, well the government fucked them in the first place. SS is a ponzi scheme and dependent on the work force can continue to fund it. I have been paying in my whole working life. Do I think there will be anything there when I retire? Hell no! I think SS should be thrown out, give a one time pay out of $50,000 tax free to those who have paid in for a X number of years and stop collecting the damn thing!
-
you're forgetting the the employer pays in as well and the social security trust fund earns interest
this is not just a system where you get out what you pay in but rather a form of insurance
there are people who take out more than they pay in and vice versa
What's the point of insurance/social security? If we all donate to a large pool and then take it out when we retire, why not just keep our money to begin with?
-
What's the point of insurance/social security? If we all donate to a large pool and then take it out when we retire, why not just keep our money to begin with?
So the government has more money to spend, besides they are much smarter than you and know what the best use of your money is ::)
-
What's the point of insurance/social security? If we all donate to a large pool and then take it out when we retire, why not just keep our money to begin with?
Why not just keep all your money to begin with and everyone pays a fee for services like police, fire, use of roads. ::)
Because the use of taxation for the good of the commons has been a vital part of this country for decades.
-
The whole interview is well worth listening to. Schiff interviews the trustee of SS and says its no different than a ponzi scheme but for intent and thast the only thing propping it up is the ability of the govt to keep taxing people.
translation = you have no source for you claim below
translation - you can't tell me where you got your claim that I don't suppose you actually have a source for this claim
most collect more more in excess than they ever paid in.
-
My dad is 68 and works full time with no interest in retiring, he gets a nice check monthly from his almost 30 years of naval career...He doesn't collect social security. This is just a friend of the family..drives me crazy, he may not get what is DUE to him.
Well then this will really piss you off, I know it pisses me off. My uncle was in the navy married a filipino lady. About 5 years ago her mother comes to the US and they fucking give her SS.
-
You know i have a simple solution for all.
Higher taxes for the rich.
Close loopholes for corporations like GE
End tax credits for children. Start CHARGING people taxes for having kids. That way as the population grows, so to will revenue.
Easy fix. :D
-
Why not just keep all your money to begin with and everyone pays a fee for services like police, fire, use of roads. ::)
Because the use of taxation for the good of the commons has been a vital part of this country for decades.
So you admit that social security is just another form of taxation? It's intended purpose has long been forgotten?
-
Why not just keep all your money to begin with and everyone pays a fee for services like police, fire, use of roads. ::)
Because the use of taxation for the good of the commons has been a vital part of this country for decades.
Interesting and all this time I thought those were handled at the state, local, county level ::) I had no idea there was a federal police or fire department.
-
Interesting and all this time I thought those were handled at the state, local, county level ::) I had no idea there was a federal police or fire department.
All this time i thought they were paid for in taxes. Isn't that the root of this issue? The payment of taxes. SS is a form of a tax.
-
All this time i thought they were paid for in taxes. Isn't that the root of this issue? The payment of taxes. SS is a form of a tax.
State and Federal taxes are 2 different things, you want a solution to the Federal Government spending problem, they can only spend on what they are constitutionally authorized to. The states handle the rest as was intended
-
All this time i thought they were paid for in taxes. Isn't that the root of this issue? The payment of taxes. SS is a form of a tax.
So you want to use SS money to pay for roads when there's not even enough money collected to pay for the retirees? Kill social security, make government just big enough to fulfill it's constitutional obligation. Problem solved.
-
Well then this will really piss you off, I know it pisses me off. My uncle was in the navy married a filipino lady. About 5 years ago her mother comes to the US and they fucking give her SS.
what kind of SS is she getting and how is she eligible for it?
-
what kind of SS is she getting and how is she eligible for it?
Thats a good question , no idea how she was eligible, not a US citizen. So your guess is as good as mine. Believe it was around $500.00
-
Thats a good question , no idea how she was eligible, not a US citizen. So your guess is as good as mine. Believe it was around $500.00
60% of immigrants are on welfare as it is.
-
So you want to use SS money to pay for roads when there's not even enough money collected to pay for the retirees? Kill social security, make government just big enough to fulfill it's constitutional obligation. Problem solved.
Already being used for purposes other than retiree benefits. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't a trust fund, it's a general fund where cash flows in and then flows out. The money has been spent already, it's just another slush fund.
Better yet, go ask your local politician or Governor where the gasoline tax goes? Or the actual fund that is supposed to be used solely for infrastructure.
You're not going to like the answer.
-
Already being used for purposes other than retiree benefits. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't a trust fund, it's a general fund where cash flows in and then flows out. The money has been spent already, it's just another slush fund.
Better yet, go ask your local politician or Governor where the gasoline tax goes? Or the actual fund that is supposed to be used solely for infrastructure.
You're not going to like the answer.
x 2
I heard a local interview by the head of AAA on that a few week ago and most people would shocked at the scams the pols are pulling with gas taxes, tolls, etc.
-
Already being used for purposes other than retiree benefits. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't a trust fund, it's a general fund where cash flows in and then flows out. The money has been spent already, it's just another slush fund.
Better yet, go ask your local politician or Governor where the gasoline tax goes? Or the actual fund that is supposed to be used solely for infrastructure.
You're not going to like the answer.
Agree, kill this hidden tax.
-
you cancel SS, and you have tens of millions of people on the streets. hungry, sick, dying, armed, willing to stick a gun in your fcking mouth as you hop your SUV because they can't eat.
It ain't right, but it's the truth.
-
you cancel SS, and you have tens of millions of people on the streets. hungry, sick, dying, armed, willing to stick a gun in your fcking mouth as you hop your SUV because they can't eat.
It ain't right, but it's the truth.
Who said anything about killing it?
-
you cancel SS, and you have tens of millions of people on the streets. hungry, sick, dying, armed, willing to stick a gun in your fcking mouth as you hop your SUV because they can't eat.
It ain't right, but it's the truth.
I always say - we are 72 hours away from TSHFT at any moment in this country.
-
you cancel SS, and you have tens of millions of people on the streets. hungry, sick, dying, armed, willing to stick a gun in your fcking mouth as you hop your SUV because they can't eat.
It ain't right, but it's the truth.
It has to be done in a gradual manner, probably take 20 years to be totally gone.
-
Who said anything about killing it?
this post is the one i was responding to. The minute you kill SS, you have a shitload of Vietnam vets picking up ol sparky and capping some youngins until they have money for meds to keep their lovely wife alive.
Kill social security, make government just big enough to fulfill it's constitutional obligation. Problem solved.
-
You know i have a simple solution for all.
Higher taxes for the rich.
Close loopholes for corporations like GE
End tax credits for children. Start CHARGING people taxes for having kids. That way as the population grows, so to will revenue.
Easy fix. :D
Still not enough revenue, not even close.
That you don't acknowledge (in this thread at least) the expenditure problem is troubling.
Or you are being facetious and it went right over my head.
-
www.usdebtclock.com
-
What's the point of insurance/social security? If we all donate to a large pool and then take it out when we retire, why not just keep our money to begin with?
^If Ron Paul gets elected, that is what the policy will be, pure honesty and common sense. Just keep your money and save it.
-
You see, LBJ became a good idea fairy with his "great society" in order to justify his existence. So he decided that we as commoners are not smart enough to keep our own money and save up for retirement on our own. No, only he and his government get to decide that, because after all, government know best.
-
^If Ron Paul gets elected, that is what the policy will be, pure honesty and common sense. Just keep your money and save it.
It seems that common sense is hard to come by, Ron Paul is one of the few. I'd like to see the liberals put in half the country with their nanny state and let the libertarian crowd have the other half. Seriously, if I could pay off my portion of the national debt right now and be allowed to live in a constitutionally free state, I'd do it.
-
Dem Congresswoman Complains She Can't Afford to Give Up Paycheck in the Event of Shutdown
The Daily Caller ^ | April 7, 2011 | Jeff Poor
With 8.8 percent unemployment across the country and more than 8 million people claiming unemployment benefits, one California congresswoman wants people to know they’re not the only ones facing financial hardship. Who else might be? The lawmaker herself.
In an appearance on MSNBC Thursday, Democratic California Rep. Linda Sánchez talked about the downsides of a federal government shutdown. Some lawmakers, to the seriousness of the issue, have said they would forgo their paychecks in the event of that shutdown. Sanchez explained she just can’t afford to go along with that idea.
“I have to tell you that I live paycheck-to-paycheck, like most Americans,” Sánchez said. “I’m still paying off my student loans. I have a 2-year-old son who I have to support, and I have to maintain residences on both coasts. It’s very difficult for me to say, ‘Hey, I can give up my paycheck,’ because the reality is, I have financial obligations that I have to meet on a month-to-month basis that doesn’t make it possible for me.”
...more (w/video)...
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
-
Instead of complete shut down, why not just let anyone go who voted for Obama?
-
With Government Shutdown Looming… Obama Plans Weekend Getaway
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/with-government-shutdown-looming-obama-plans-weekend-getaway/ ^ | 4/7/11 | Jim Hoft
Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2011 11:01:00 PM by Nachum
Unreal.
Life’s a party. With the government shutdown looming… Obama plans his weekend getaway. Daily Press reported:
The leader of the free world may be coming to Williamsburg for some rest and relaxation if Congress is able to come to agreement on the budget. President Obama and the First Family are planning to visit the area this weekend in what the White House described Wednesday as a “long-planned family trip to Colonial Williamsburg.”
But the trip might get grounded if a government shutdown can’t be averted by Republicans and Democrats in Congress.
-
End tax credits for children. Start CHARGING people taxes for having kids. That way as the population grows, so to will revenue
THIS IS A GREAT IDEA, MAKE THE PEOPLE WHO MADE THE CHOICE PAY, NOT THE PEOPLE WHO DONT WANT KIDS OR TO PAY FOR THEM.
-
Instead of complete shut down, why not just let anyone go who voted for Obama?
Racist post reported.
-
With Government Shutdown Looming… Obama Plans Weekend Getaway
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/with-government-shutdown-looming-obama-plans-weekend-getaway/ ^ | 4/7/11 | Jim Hoft
Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2011 11:01:00 PM by Nachum
Unreal.
Life’s a party. With the government shutdown looming… Obama plans his weekend getaway. Daily Press reported:
The leader of the free world may be coming to Williamsburg for some rest and relaxation if Congress is able to come to agreement on the budget. President Obama and the First Family are planning to visit the area this weekend in what the White House described Wednesday as a “long-planned family trip to Colonial Williamsburg.”
But the trip might get grounded if a government shutdown can’t be averted by Republicans and Democrats in Congress.
Us hardworking Virginians don't want the Obama family desecrating one of our most historical locations. How much is this trip going to cost the taxpayer? Couple hundred thousand for security?