US Government Shutdown

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Until they get the money for their wall as a ransom, they'll keep holding the public services hostage. There is no middle ground here, Trump won't budge until all his demands are met. With the suspension of food inspections, limited operation of the National Weather Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and the IRS, and the near of a million of unpaid federal workers, I wonder where the biggest threat to Americans really is right now...

Wonder how this affects the FBI and any related high-profile investigations now.

Xsjadoblayde:
Wonder how this affects the FBI and any related high-profile investigations now.

Are the FBI like the Secret Service where they're still working but with no pay? Because I hadn't considered that this might be a deliberate attempt at slowing the investigation now his governmental clout's been weakened

What happens if the essential workers just say, 'fuck it. I'm not getting paid. Why turn up to work.'

trunkage:
What happens if the essential workers just say, 'fuck it. I'm not getting paid. Why turn up to work.'

They won't. Besides, they probably can make do. Definitely, they'll be fine, 100%. They're probably just Democrats anyway, so it doesn't really matter. And they're some of the wall's biggest supporters, these federal workers, they think the wall's a great idea, they're some of Trump's biggest fans. Do you know what's older than a government shutdown? Agriculture. Agriculture works, government shutdowns work, definitely. Definitely Trump might possibly decide to get the wall done by declaring a national emergency. His lawyers have told him it will definitely be 100% legal, possibly. He might definitely probably do it in the next week, or the next month, or who knows when but definitely soon. Although he won't have to, because Congress will pay for it. MAKE AMERICA GREATEFE AGENN!

If anyone would like to be a proper expert on concrete and its use in large structures, I recommend Chudley and Greeno's Construction Handbook, 9th edition, or you could watch Tom Hardy with a cold in Locke.

Agema:

trunkage:
What happens if the essential workers just say, 'fuck it. I'm not getting paid. Why turn up to work.'

They won't. Besides, they probably can make do. Definitely, they'll be fine, 100%. They're probably just Democrats anyway, so it doesn't really matter. And they're some of the wall's biggest supporters, these federal workers, they think the wall's a great idea, they're some of Trump's biggest fans. Do you know what's older than a government shutdown? Agriculture. Agriculture works, government shutdowns work, definitely. Definitely Trump might possibly decide to get the wall done by declaring a national emergency. His lawyers have told him it will definitely be 100% legal, possibly. He might definitely probably do it in the next week, or the next month, or who knows when but definitely soon. Although he won't have to, because Congress will pay for it. MAKE AMERICA GREATEFE AGENN!

Who let a Trump campaign writer in here

trunkage:
What happens if the essential workers just say, 'fuck it. I'm not getting paid. Why turn up to work.'

I wouldn't go to a job that wasn't paying me, and I encourage them to do the same.

Workers rights is always an after-thought. Rules were never put in place BEFORE workers were abused. They ALWAYS came after. Cause rules are reactionary, not precautionary.

Xsjadoblayde:
Wonder how this affects the FBI and any related high-profile investigations now.

The Mueller investigation apparently has it's own funding that isn't affected, but apparently the FBI and the Secret Service aren't being paid.

Which I can imagine is making the Secret Service rather resentful, having to protect a man who is denying them a paycheck because he's throwing his tantrum.

I can only imagine if the Secret Service said "Fuck it, we're striking/quitting". Would Trump get the message then? Would he finally see it as a problem because it finally affects something he cares about(him and his family's protection)?

Dalisclock:

I can only imagine if the Secret Service said "Fuck it, we're striking/quitting". Would Trump get the message then? Would he finally see it as a problem because it finally affects something he cares about(him and his family's protection)?

Yeah well, they made laws to ensure that people like that can't strike. Personally, I consider requiring people to work without pay tantamount to slavery (even if, theoretically, they get paid later). I certainly think the US government might deserve mass resignations, because the loss of so many staff with accumuated training and experience would likely damage departments for months and even years to come.

When the government is unable to pay its contractual obligations, bankruptcy proceedings should be brought against it like anyone or anything else. I'm aware this would be catastrophic, but it would at least stop politicians dicking around with people's livelihoods in such a fashion.

Agema:

Dalisclock:

I can only imagine if the Secret Service said "Fuck it, we're striking/quitting". Would Trump get the message then? Would he finally see it as a problem because it finally affects something he cares about(him and his family's protection)?

Yeah well, they made laws to ensure that people like that can't strike. Personally, I consider requiring people to work without pay tantamount to slavery (even if, theoretically, they get paid later). I certainly think the US government might deserve mass resignations, because the loss of so many staff with accumuated training and experience would likely damage departments for months and even years to come.

When the government is unable to pay its contractual obligations, bankruptcy proceedings should be brought against it like anyone or anything else. I'm aware this would be catastrophic, but it would at least stop politicians dicking around with people's livelihoods in such a fashion.

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

The worst of the worst.. THESE seven Republicans voted against back pay for furloughed workers affected by the shutdown:

Theodore(Ted) Scott Yoho (Fla.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Yoho

Justin Amash (Mich)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Amash

Andy Biggs (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Biggs

Paul Gosar (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gosar

Glen Grothman (Wis)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Grothman

Thomas Massie (Ky)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Massie

Chip Roy (TX)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_Roy

Take a good look at the guys who think people should work without pay and suffer so they can force Americans to pay for something that they Promised they would not have to. If you live in any of their states, you should write them and let them know exactly how you feel about what they are doing to people.

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

Lil devils x:
The worst of the worst.. THESE seven Republicans voted against back pay for furloughed workers affected by the shutdown:

Theodore(Ted) Scott Yoho (Fla.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Yoho

Justin Amash (Mich)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Amash

Andy Biggs (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Biggs

Paul Gosar (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gosar

Glen Grothman (Wis)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Grothman

Thomas Massie (Ky)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Massie

Chip Roy (TX)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_Roy

Take a good look at the guys who think people should work without pay and suffer so they can force Americans to pay for something that they Promised they would not have to. If you live in any of their states, you should write them and let them know exactly how you feel about what they are doing to people.

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

Did they bother to give any explanation about why they wanted people to go without pay or didn't they even bother to weakly defend themselves?

Lil devils x:
The worst of the worst.. THESE seven Republicans voted against back pay for furloughed workers affected by the shutdown:

...

Take a good look at the guys who think people should work without pay

Aren't the furloughed workers not working for no pay, they're the ones that have effectively been rendered unemployed for the time being? And told to become mystery shoppers to make ends meet

Thaluikhain:

Lil devils x:
The worst of the worst.. THESE seven Republicans voted against back pay for furloughed workers affected by the shutdown:

...

Take a good look at the guys who think people should work without pay

Aren't the furloughed workers not working for no pay, they're the ones that have effectively been rendered unemployed for the time being? And told to become mystery shoppers to make ends meet

They worked in the beginning of the shutdown and then were furloughed after and their back pay will not be paid at all, even for the time they worked. The shutdown happened in stages. They had a period before switching to " essential personnel only" just prior to that taking effect.

Those that were considered "contract labor" however, stopped working immediately and are not going to be compensated at all in any way.

Hades:

Lil devils x:
The worst of the worst.. THESE seven Republicans voted against back pay for furloughed workers affected by the shutdown:

Theodore(Ted) Scott Yoho (Fla.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Yoho

Justin Amash (Mich)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Amash

Andy Biggs (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Biggs

Paul Gosar (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gosar

Glen Grothman (Wis)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Grothman

Thomas Massie (Ky)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Massie

Chip Roy (TX)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_Roy

Take a good look at the guys who think people should work without pay and suffer so they can force Americans to pay for something that they Promised they would not have to. If you live in any of their states, you should write them and let them know exactly how you feel about what they are doing to people.

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

Did they bother to give any explanation about why they wanted people to go without pay or didn't they even bother to weakly defend themselves?

Most of them are part of the Tea party Freedom Caucus. Some gave some nonsense about how they didn't like the idea of them being forced to pay workers during future shutdowns and others stated they worried that this would remove leverage. Gosar actually thinks that shutdowns are a useful tool Saying, "This ill-conceived legislation takes away a useful tool in holding government accountable"

I really wish these people understood that people should not be held hostage to get what they want and that just makes them terrorists. Forcing them to have to pay regardless of shutdown hopefully will reduce their willingness to want to try to force shutdowns in the future.

Lil devils x:
Paul Gosar (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gosar

Paul Gosar? How the heck did he get re-elected? He was subjected to the most brutal owning in the history of politics.

Seriously. It was amazing.

Lil devils x:
They worked in the beginning of the shutdown and then were furloughed after and their back pay will not be paid at all, even for the time they worked. The shutdown happened in stages. They had a period before switching to " essential personnel only" just prior to that taking effect.

Ah, I see, thanks.

bastardofmelbourne:

Lil devils x:
Paul Gosar (Ariz)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gosar

Paul Gosar? How the heck did he get re-elected? He was subjected to the most brutal owning in the history of politics.

Seriously. It was amazing.

He represents one of the MOST gerrymandered districts in the US:

Arizona's 4th congressional district
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/gerrymandering/

86.8% White, 2.2% Native Am., 1.7% Black
https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona%27s_4th_Congressional_District

When I have spoken of the groups of white men who come in to rape and abuse Native Americans on Reservations, THIS is one of the areas I know for a fact they have come from to do so. It was settled by those who were part of the forced assimilation of the people on reservations and much racism and brutality exists to this day so I am not surprised they would elect this man.

Dalisclock:

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

I would totally love a bill that blocked salary (+ pension, expenses, etc.) payments to the US legislature and executive should federal employees go without pay.

I'd be against in a sense because the slavery argument applies to salaries of politicians as well, but if it is going to be done, let's slap the guys at the top in the chops with it as well.

Agema:

Dalisclock:

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

I would totally love a bill that blocked salary (+ pension, expenses, etc.) payments to the US legislature and executive should federal employees go without pay.

I'd be against in a sense because the slavery argument applies to salaries of politicians as well, but if it is going to be done, let's slap the guys at the top in the chops with it as well.

To those with privilege, equality feels like oppression.

Dalisclock:

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

Yep.

The issue is, Trump and previous politicians have done a great job at removing all the checks and balances that our government once had. Who exactly is going to enforce that and make the congress and White House go without pay?

The only way for that to happen is if the American public to get out pitchforks and demand more equality.

Agema:

Dalisclock:

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

I would totally love a bill that blocked salary (+ pension, expenses, etc.) payments to the US legislature and executive should federal employees go without pay.

I'd be against in a sense because the slavery argument applies to salaries of politicians as well, but if it is going to be done, let's slap the guys at the top in the chops with it as well.

It isn't slavery for an employer to withhold payments and benefits for jobs rendered if the employee isn't doing their job, is it?

Gethsemani:

Agema:

Dalisclock:

At very least, Demand that if a budget cannot be approved, neither congress or the White House should get paid. I'm also in favor of turning off the lights, water and AC/Heat when the bills aren't paid. One would think that would give them some incentive to fix this shit.

I would totally love a bill that blocked salary (+ pension, expenses, etc.) payments to the US legislature and executive should federal employees go without pay.

I'd be against in a sense because the slavery argument applies to salaries of politicians as well, but if it is going to be done, let's slap the guys at the top in the chops with it as well.

It isn't slavery for an employer to withhold payments and benefits for jobs rendered if the employee isn't doing their job, is it?

There is not a very principled and value neutral way to define the job of a politician in terms of passing legislation, as declining to pass (or blocking) legislation is an equally important use of power. You can have a principled and useful measure or you can have a value neutral measure; you cannot have both. Their job performance can't really be measured by volume of legislation passed nor the opposite; public opinion is a somewhat better measure (and more on point) but it also has pitfalls. Frankly, I don't want Schumer or Pelosi to have yet another reason to spinelessly cave on funding a border wall even if it could mean that Trump and the GOP would also have another reason to abandon the project of building a monument to racism-- or at least not tie it to passing the rest of the budget.

Seanchaidh:

There is not a very principled and value neutral way to define the job of a politician in terms of passing legislation, as declining to pass (or blocking) legislation is an equally important use of power. You can have a principled and useful measure or you can have a value neutral measure; you cannot have both. Their job performance can't really be measured by volume of legislation passed nor the opposite; public opinion is a somewhat better measure (and more on point) but it also has pitfalls. Frankly, I don't want Schumer or Pelosi to have yet another reason to spinelessly cave on funding a border wall even if it could mean that Trump and the GOP would also have another reason to abandon the project of building a monument to racism-- or at least not tie it to passing the rest of the budget.

Oh, I know. I was mostly being tongue in cheek with that comment. However, the current GOP/Trump stance of demanding funding for a border wall that a majority of US voters do not want and shutting down the federal administration for leverage, which voters also do not want, could absolutely be seen as an ideal time to argue that politicians are not doing their jobs of making sure the state is run in a semi-smooth fashion.

For me, it is also a question about equality. Technically, senators, congressmen, the President and his staff are all servants of the federal state, same as all those civil servants in the federal administration. If the employees on the lower rungs of the hierarchy ain't getting paid, why should the the guys at the top be? If they want to use a federal shutdown as a leverage, they should bear the burden of not getting paid, the same as every other federal official, elected or not.

skywolfblue:

Yep.

The issue is, Trump and previous politicians have done a great job at removing all the checks and balances that our government once had. Who exactly is going to enforce that and make the congress and White House go without pay?

The only way for that to happen is if the American public to get out pitchforks and demand more equality.

It shouldn't really be that much of a problem. It is a problem because the current president of the USA has a somewhat underdeveloped sense of good democratic process. He wants to build a wall, and with his autocratic sensibilities is infuriated that he can't just tell the legislature to do what he wants, so he attempts to bully the legislature into conceding. His other suggested route out is national emergency - also plainly an abusive use of a law to attempt to circumvent proper democratic channels. His holding the government itself to ransom to get his way is the third aspect of authoritarian mindset.

Historians would note that where democracy tends to collapse towards authoritarianism, it's often because the law has inevitable loopholes which unscrupulous politicians abuse. Democracy is thus maintained not just by law, but the adherence of politicians to conventions of good democratic process. Trump is demonstrating to the USA just what happens when the president doesn't want to follow democratic conventions. Normally one might expect the legislature to resist en masse, but unfortunately the Republican members of the legislature are utterly craven to stand up to the wannabe tyrant in their midst, largely one suspects because they're signficantly less popular with their voters than he is. That itself partly because a lot of their voters aren't much interested in good democratic process either.

Of course this fiaso also illustrates Trump's incompetence. He had two years of total Republican governmental control to get that wall built, and he decides to force the issue just when they lost it. Plus he escalates the argument with some superbly ill-considered testosterone negotiation to the point where it's either victory or humiliation for either side, practically compelling the Democratic Party into full resistance. Broadly, with the public far more on the side of the Democrats, he's setting himself up for a painful defeat.

Gethsemani:
For me, it is also a question about equality. Technically, senators, congressmen, the President and his staff are all servants of the federal state, same as all those civil servants in the federal administration. If the employees on the lower rungs of the hierarchy ain't getting paid, why should the the guys at the top be? If they want to use a federal shutdown as a leverage, they should bear the burden of not getting paid, the same as every other federal official, elected or not.

That's fair enough, though I'd still not want them to be tempted to pass a shit bill just to get paid. One alternative might be to mandate payment of existing federal employees with or without a budget.

Seanchaidh:
One alternative might be to mandate payment of existing federal employees with or without a budget.

Yeah. I really think "continue as usual" should not require legislative action. We don't need this sort of hostage taking to be a possibility.

I actually see Trump winning out in the end.

The thing is that Trumps voters really REALLY care about the wall and are likely to sacrifice quite a bit to see it made. Its also rather helpful that they don't have to make the sacrifices themselves. Many might not see themselves as being very effected by government workers not getting paid and since the Trump campaign ran on a very hateful platform towards the government they aren't likely to be troubled by those workers not getting paid either.

But Democrat voters do care about federal employees going without pay. Its one of their biggest arguments, that it terrible for those people. But they do not care very much about the wall. They don't agree with it, they don't like what it represents, they doubt it is effective and they want to deny Trump his victory but their personal investment in the wall is much lower than that of Trump voters. I think that at one point the Democrat voters will run out of patient and start blaming the democrats. They might start forming the belief that giving the big baby his wall is a lesser evil than letting the government workers rot away for months.

For Democrats the wall is just one of the many things they disagree with but for those duped by Trump its a matter of life and death. As such I think Trump's base will stomach this situation for much longer than the Democrats. For them the future of the nation is at stake.

Hades:
I actually see Trump winning out in the end.

The thing is that Trumps voters really REALLY care about the wall and are likely to sacrifice quite a bit to see it made. Its also rather helpful that they don't have to make the sacrifices themselves. Many might not see themselves as being very effected by government workers not getting paid and since the Trump campaign ran on a very hateful platform towards the government they aren't likely to be troubled by those workers not getting paid either.

But Democrat voters do care about federal employees going without pay. Its one of their biggest arguments, that it terrible for those people. But they do not care very much about the wall. They don't agree with it, they don't like what it represents, they doubt it is effective and they want to deny Trump his victory but their personal investment in the wall is much lower than that of Trump voters. I think that at one point the Democrat voters will run out of patient and start blaming the democrats. They might start forming the belief that giving the big baby his wall is a lesser evil than letting the government workers rot away for months.

For Democrats the wall is just one of the many things they disagree with but for those duped by Trump its a matter of life and death. As such I think Trump's base will stomach this situation for much longer than the Democrats. For them the future of the nation is at stake.

There are two factors to consider here.

1. Farmers are apparently unable to get loans processed or subsides due to the department of agriculture being shuttered. Farm Country apparently voted very much for Trump, so he is hurting them with this shutdown and I think some of them are starting to realize it. That could add pressure to end this on the GOP side if farmers are in danger of going under.

2. The Democrats have a very clear incentive not to give in on this and that's the fact that Trump has already reneged several times on deals. The DACA protections for $25 Billion deal a year ago was torpedoed by Trump despite saying he was for it and just 3 weeks ago, Trump was all set to sign clean funding bills until the far right started screaming about "Trump Loses and the Democrats Win". There's no reason not to think that if Schumer and Pelosi would say "Fine, you can have your stupid wall", Trump wouldn't immediately say "Well, if you're so keen, how about $25 billion instead?"

And there's the implicit fact Trump knows he can pull the same shit again next time funding bills are due. Reward him for throwing Tantrums and he'll keep throwing Tantrums. Showing that the House will not be bullied the way Trump has bullied the Senate(or at least, Sen McConnell) into submission is part of why we're here.

Ironically, Trump could say he was gonna reopen the government tomorrow, declare victory(because Trump) and his base will still forgive him, because why wouldn't they? They've already shown nothing he says or does can make them turn against him, so why does it matter if he has a real victory or an imagined one(which will be spun by FOX NEWS into a overwhelming victory for Trump).

Dalisclock:
2. The Democrats have a very clear incentive not to give in on this and that's the fact that Trump has already reneged several times on deals. The DACA protections for $25 Billion deal a year ago was torpedoed by Trump despite saying he was for it and just 3 weeks ago, Trump was all set to sign clean funding bills until the far right started screaming about "Trump Loses and the Democrats Win". There's no reason not to think that if Schumer and Pelosi would say "Fine, you can have your stupid wall", Trump wouldn't immediately say "Well, if you're so keen, how about $25 billion instead?"

And there's the implicit fact Trump knows he can pull the same shit again next time funding bills are due. Reward him for throwing Tantrums and he'll keep throwing Tantrums. Showing that the House will not be bullied the way Trump has bullied the Senate(or at least, Sen McConnell) into submission is part of why we're here.

Certainly, yes, it'd be a bad move for the Democrats to cave in, but they are playing chicken with people's lives and I couldn't totally blame them if they lost their never.

Yeah ultimately the democrat will almost certainly lose this battle.

Trump base actively think the government is bad and will believe anything Trump says.

Independent don't really follow the news and will blame both side equally.

Democrat base actively care about the government and the more this goes on the less they believe in government in general and the more likely they are to skip next election.

Sucks to say but they'll probably cave in at some point cause the longer this goes on the more it hurt them. They could try to do more symbolic action that could make the news (like stop paying elected members salary or try to restore salary to some people), but the problem is Mitch block anything before it goes to the senate floor, so technically republican never voted against those.

Although Mueller report might be coming out soon, that could throw a wrench in the whole process depending on what it is (although at this point I don't think there can ever be proof strong enough to change republican mind).

Palindromemordnilap:
Are the FBI like the Secret Service where they're still working but with no pay? Because I hadn't considered that this might be a deliberate attempt at slowing the investigation now his governmental clout's been weakened

Not only that, but every time the words "longest shutdown in US history" are in news headlines, all I can imagine is trump masturbating over them as yet another "Biggest!...longest! BESTEST EVA! hmmm...meeeeeeeeeeeeeee big" claim being done for him.

The democrats shouldn't cave cause this isn't hurting them. Unfortunately, moral decency isn't enough to mobilize most of this country, but while Trump supporters are willing to spite themselves in support of their own bigotry, those who aren't moral enough to vote against Trump atleast have their own self-interest at heart enough to finally think 'Hey, maybe letting Trump ruin everything due to my own inaction WASNT worth it'.

This is how empires fall, but so be it. I'd rather we build something new and better from the ashes than continue this shit show.

Dalisclock:

The DACA protections for $25 Billion deal a year ago was torpedoed by Trump despite saying he was for it.

I don't feel this is a fair characterization. The democrats aren't voting DACA protections through, despite overwhelming popular approval of DACA and a fair amount of Republican representatives who are for it on the record. Democrats have voted unanimously against bills that would make that trade, Donald Trump hasn't vetoed any. Frankly, Donald Trump hasn't vetoed a single bill, and we have little reason to believe that Trump would veto that deal if they put it on his desk. As best as I can tell, the deal that he supposedly torpedoed was a pinky promise from Chuck Schumer to fund the wall in return for Trump continuing to defer action against Dreamers perpetually by unilateral executive action.

If they want that trade, write it up and put it on Trump's desk. I'm fairly certain they're content to keep DACA and the wall active controversies long enough to run on in 2020. It's much harder to run against the status quo if you actually make progress.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here