Possible Federal Government shut-down

[KellyinAvon]

I've been a Fed of some sort since February 86. I remember the "shutdown" in 95. My boss was a civvie (retired MSgt, was close to retiring from civil service.) When he was told the civilians were furloughed he about ran over everybody between him and the door. Things seemed to go fine with just the GIs there. I'm not sure how things would work at an all-civilian organization in the DoD. Support functions (especially at training bases/no operational mission) are often contracted or all civil service.

Veterans Health Administration facilities (VA Med Center, outpatient clinics, etc) will be open for business as usual.

 

[Spear Dane]

How much money are we saving per day and how do we make this go on a while?

 

[Sylvain]

How much money are we saving per day and how do we make this go on a while?

A shutdown is not saving money, it's costing money

You have nearly 1 million government employees not being paid so they are not buying stuff.

The last time the government shutdown in 2013 for 16 days the U.S. economy took a $24 billion hit, according to Standard & Poor's analysis

 

[jamil]

What? You sure you were watching the same movie, or did you just pick and choose when to bring bias into the movie?

You brought bias into the discussion. You said it was biased left. I commented that the bias was fairly strong.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

The sides seemed to have flipped priorities.

If you're a Republican it's okay to shut the government down for your causes, but it's evil if Democrats shut it down for theirs.

If you're a Democrat it's okay to shut the government down for your causes, but it's evil if Republicans shut it down for theirs.

If acceptability of shutting down the government is cause-dependent, that may be a sign you're an ideologue, or a hypocrite. Not necessarily. But maybe.

I'm not sure that it doesn't just mean that you're an average voter.

 

[Woobie]

A shutdown is not saving money, it's costing money

You have nearly 1 million government employees not being paid so they are not buying stuff.

Thats not really sound economics. If it worked that way, the economy would healthiest and the government would be in the black if 100% of the population were government employees.

 

[Woobie]

The sides seemed to have flipped priorities.

If you're a Republican it's okay to shut the government down for your causes, but it's evil if Democrats shut it down for theirs.

If you're a Democrat it's okay to shut the government down for your causes, but it's evil if Republicans shut it down for theirs.

If acceptability of shutting down the government is cause-dependent, that may be a sign you're an ideologue, or a hypocrite. Not necessarily. But maybe.

I think this is very true. I was glad for the shutdown in 2013, but that's just because of how I feel about the bloated D.C. monster. If shutting it down or keeping it open is good or bad depending upon who is doing it, you've likely sacrificed your principles on the altar of a party or ideology.

 

[Woobie]

I'm not sure that it doesn't just mean that you're an average voter.

Average voters are part of what has gotten us into this mess. They allow the corrupt system to perpetuate.

 

[BugI02]

Yes, what I'm talking about happened on the 9th.

I think a lot of people, depending on their politics, have plenty of points to make illustrating the hypocrisy of both parties; and the president's tweets from those times haven't disappeared either.

More ... complete ... information about the 9 Jan 18 meeting on DACA and immigration reform, from a source (NPR) I gather you might approve of. Color emphasis is mine

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...-wall-and-daca-action-then-immigration-reform
Trump suggests 2-phase immigration deal that includes agreement on ‘Dreamers’

“I think my positions are going to be what the people in this room come up with,” Trump said during a Cabinet Room meeting with a bipartisan group of nearly two dozen lawmakers, adding, “I am very much reliant upon the people in this room.” A group of journalists observed the meandering meeting for an extraordinary length of time — about 55 minutes — that involved Trump seeking input from Democrats and Republicans alike in a freewheeling exchange on the contentious issue.

The White House said after the meeting that lawmakers had agreed to narrow the scope of the negotiations to four areas: border security, family-based “chain migration,” the visa lottery, and the DACA policy, winning nods from Democrats.

On immigration, the president said he would insist on construction of a border security wall as part of an agreement involving young immigrants, but he said Congress could then pursue a comprehensive immigration overhaul in a second phase of talks.

I read that as; no wall, no DACA deal

(Presidential) Word

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

I personally know some good people who work for the federal govt, and I hate to think about the hardship they may have to go through because a bunch of people don't have the sense of responsibility or honor to do their own jobs.

And I also hate to see that there are some Americans who could give a crap about that hardship.

 

[dozer13]

More ... complete ... information about the 9 Jan 18 meeting on DACA and immigration reform, from a source (NPR) I gather you might approve of. Color emphasis is mine

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...-wall-and-daca-action-then-immigration-reform
Trump suggests 2-phase immigration deal that includes agreement on ‘Dreamers’







I read that as; no wall, no DACA deal

(Presidential) Word

Got to say this ones on trump, and gen Kelly.



https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...trump-but-he-backed-out-of-the-deal/23338690/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...-to-prevent-shutdown-but-heres-the-truth/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill....ng-with-trump-like-negotiating-with-jello?amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...ly-helped-to-kill-deal-to-avoid-shutdown.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/01/20/politics/shutdown-tick-tock/index.html

I know CNN ewww but they have a really good play by play breakdown that verified by trump's an schumer's twittering.

 

[DRob]

Just saw this on FaceBook. "As the storm hits and hundreds of thousands of non-essential government employees are being sent home, perhaps it's time we asked ourselves......why are there hundreds of thousands of non-essential government employees??"

Great question but it also begs definition of non-essential. I'd submit Congress as a great place to start.

 

[bwframe]

Just a reminder here folks.

A lot made excuses and threw away their vote to the third party or whatever six years ago because of "feelings." Since then we have had Joe Donnelly, a lib that has effectively cancelled out every single important Senate vote for Indiana constituents.

While Donnelly may or may not make a difference in voting on this specific measure, the atmosphere of a solid counted on two vote swing could have changed a whole lot of things over these six years.

How 'bout we not forget that again in November?

 

[jedi]

From Jan 9th


Those are the president's exact words, concerning a DACA/Immigration reform bill.

Do you know what the terms of that deal was?
Curious to see what he did not like

 

[jedi]

How much money are we saving per day and how do we make this go on a while?

A shutdown is not saving money, it's costing money

You have nearly 1 million government employees not being paid so they are not buying stuff.

Plus you have a lot of pending federal contracts that will be put on hold or miss their deadline. So contractor cant complete work, .gov wont take posession of final product in time, delays extend leases, etc...

 

[Kutnupe14]

Do you know what the terms of that deal was?
Curious to see what he did not like

I do not. I'm imagining that he's probably against some form of DACA protection. I think, personally, that Democrats should give him his wall, if that ensures DACA protections. If that was presented to him, and he rejected THAT, then we are in for a long shutdown.

 

[jedi]

How much money are we saving per day and how do we make this go on a while?

Just saw this on FaceBook. "As the storm hits and hundreds of thousands of non-essential government employees are being sent home, perhaps it's time we asked ourselves......why are there hundreds of thousands of non-essential government employees??"

Great question but it also begs definition of non-essential. I'd submit Congress as a great place to start.

Already replied to this.
The non-essential is just a label given to workers that dont work on the agency primary mission but are needed by the agency for the worker thay does.

Va means a doctor worker. Doctor needs a computer network to work his job and thus that needs an it guy.
It guy is non-essential for the va mission but its more costly to outsource it job then to hire one and have him around.

 

[jamil]

From Jan 9th


Those are the president's exact words, concerning a DACA/Immigration reform bill.

It may be untrue. Did he say it to deceive people or did he say it believing one thing and then when it didn’t go as he thought he changed his mind? Seems obvious that he believed that he would sign the bill and then his handlers convinced him not to. I’d call him foolish for not seeing how this was going to go. But Sayin he lied isn’t evident.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It may be untrue. Did he say it to deceive people or did he say it believing one thing and then when it didn’t go as he thought he changed his mind? Seems obvious that he believed that he would sign the bill and then his handlers convinced him not to. I’d call him foolish for not seeing how this was going to go. But Sayin he lied isn’t evident.

It's evident if one chooses to define words as they are presented in the dictionary. Not so much evident to those who would like to play fast and loose with the meanings of words.

 

[bwframe]

It may be untrue. Did he say it to deceive people or did he say it believing one thing and then when it didn’t go as he thought he changed his mind? Seems obvious that he believed that he would sign the bill and then his handlers convinced him not to. I’d call him foolish for not seeing how this was going to go. But Sayin he lied isn’t evident.

The pres said he'd sign whatever the group he spoke to on Tuesday decided to get voted through. Two liberal senators backing an amnesty bill is hardly that. No real republicans would have voted for that rubbish.

Durbin and Graham plotted to pull a stunt that they were to some degree successful in. All the news media, libs and nevertrumpers parrot "the president lied" narrative.

The good news is, no more being fooled by the Trojan horse Lindsay Graham.