• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Will there be a Government shut down tonight?

Will there be a Government shut down tonight?

  • Total voters
    25
obvious Child said:
You call military being paid with IOUs not a shutdown? The entire national parks being offline not a shutdown? 80% of NASA going home? 800,000 civilian military contractors not working not a shutdown?

You are wrong. As usual, man up for once in your life.
Click to expand...

In case you missed it, funding for active duty military was signed by the President last night, and the 800,000 number being bantered about is the total amount of federal workers furloughed which is about a third...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
In case you missed it, funding for active duty military was signed by the President last night, and the 800,000 number being bantered about is the total amount of federal workers furloughed which is about a third...
Click to expand...

Doesn't change NASA. Doesn't change the parks. Doesn't change health inspectors. Doesn't change food inspectors. Doesn't change the NIH. Doesn't change science research overall. Doesn't change immigration. Doesn't change SBA. Doesn't change that a sizable portion of the government is offline.
 
obvious Child said:
Doesn't change NASA. Doesn't change the parks. Doesn't change health inspectors. Doesn't change food inspectors. Doesn't change the NIH. Doesn't change science research overall. Doesn't change immigration. Doesn't change SBA. Doesn't change that a sizable portion of the government is offline.
Click to expand...

Only non-essential government personnel were furloughed...
 
Neomalthusian said:
For as large and advanced as human brains are, I find the notion that catastrophe, starvation and death are a mere couple missed paychecks away to be very strange. It should inspire some deeper reflection on the new profound vulnerability of humans.

How have we survived this long, and what the hell happened to us that we've become so helpless? Should we be living in such a state of helplessness and dependence? How can we back away from this edge of utter catastrophe and get back to a state of a little bit more confidence and self-reliance?
Click to expand...



I didn't say anything about starvation and death, but two missed house payments can be difficult to make up and two missed utility and telephone bills will be a BIG problem...How about no water or garbage pickup?
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Only non-essential government personnel were furloughed...
Click to expand...

Your point? Read what I posted. All of those were furloughed. Only a tiny portion of health and food inspectors are still on the job and only a fraction of researchers are still working to maintain basic power to experiments. We're already in the hole a billion in interest due to this mess.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Yeah it does. Call Congress at ten pm.

Servicemen aren't government, they work for the government. I do serve i am a peace officer, even though I work at night and in weekends I know the government doesn't.
Click to expand...




So you think that Congress "is" the government?
 
Juanita said:
I didn't say anything about starvation and death,
Click to expand...

You know that a lot of progressive/liberal people do though, right? How many times per day are anti-welfare conservatives asked "should they just die in the streets??" I see it all the time.

but two missed house payments can be difficult to make up and two missed utility and telephone bills will be a BIG problem...How about no water or garbage pickup?
Click to expand...

Well that's right in line with what I was saying. What has happened with people that they live so close to the edge of catastrophe at all times? Why do they willingly live right the edge of their means or beyond? (I actually have quite a few thoughts about why they do, but I'll ask rhetorically for now)
 
Neomalthusian said:
You know that a lot of progressive/liberal people do though, right? How many times per day are anti-welfare conservatives asked "should they just die in the streets??" I see it all the time.



Well that's right in line with what I was saying. What has happened with people that they live so close to the edge of catastrophe at all times? Why do they willingly live right the edge of their means or beyond? (I actually have quite a few thoughts about why they do, but I'll ask rhetorically for now)
Click to expand...



Well, lower wages maybe, along with rising costs on everything....not able to maintain a savings account or make any money on one if you have one.. They haven't gone to the edge, the edge has come into them...
 
Juanita said:
Well, lower wages maybe, along with rising costs on everything...
Click to expand...

If you look over the course of a hundred years or more, you'll see people used to be a lot poorer, with much lower standard of living, and yet were much more independent in meeting their own needs. Wages may have stagnated or dropped in real terms, but the standard of living has been increasing at the same time. Compare today's working poor to the poor homesteaders of 150 years ago, and the difference in technology and the lack of any social safety net reveals the poor back then were unfathomably worse off and yet were more independent in meeting their needs (out of necessity). This leads me to wonder if the poor might actually NOT die en masse in the streets if the social safety net went away, rather they would simply return to a standard of living we haven't seen among our poor for a hundred years or more.

not able to maintain a savings account or make any money on one if you have one..
Click to expand...

This suggests criticism of our monetary policies. Could it be that we agree that our monetary policies suck?

They haven't gone to the edge, the edge has come into them...
Click to expand...

Maybe it's both. Maybe it's really difficult to resist living at the edge of your means when technology kicks as much ass as it does today, plus with a widening social safety net, maybe it removes the fear of failure a bit?
 
Neomalthusian said:
If you look over the course of a hundred years or more, you'll see people used to be a lot poorer, with much lower standard of living, and yet were much more independent in meeting their own needs. Wages may have stagnated or dropped in real terms, but the standard of living has been increasing at the same time. Compare today's working poor to the poor homesteaders of 150 years ago, and the difference in technology and the lack of any social safety net reveals the poor back then were unfathomably worse off and yet were more independent in meeting their needs (out of necessity). This leads me to wonder if the poor might actually NOT die en masse in the streets if the social safety net went away, rather they would simply return to a standard of living we haven't seen among our poor for a hundred years or more.



This suggests criticism of our monetary policies. Could it be that we agree that our monetary policies suck?



Maybe it's both. Maybe it's really difficult to resist living at the edge of your means when technology kicks as much ass as it does today, plus with a widening social safety net, maybe it removes the fear of failure a bit?
Click to expand...




Society was different then..Families lived close to one another in mostly ethnic neighborhoods..Each neighborhood was a "village" unto itself...and it cared for itself.....

Low interest rates may be great for homebuyers, but hell on people trying to save a buck.

The safety net is imperative for those who have fallen and are falling through the cracks.. You may think that you will never need a helping hand, then--voila--you do...
 
obvious Child said:
Boehner is a good man in a bad job. And once again, the opposite of what Navy said happens.
Click to expand...

... having watched more severe indictments of him in the past, I want to note that Navy is an elder and helped give the younger generations the world we inherited. It comes with flaws, and he is flawed, but it is moral to show respect to people who have played such a role regardless of whether or not their actions or words perfectly fit our perception of meritorious behavior. Gifts are gifts, even if they come with dents, and our lives are gifts from our ancestors.
 
Last edited:
Juanita said:
Society was different then..Families lived close to one another in mostly ethnic neighborhoods..Each neighborhood was a "village" unto itself...and it cared for itself.....
Click to expand...

So why don't we organize and relocalize our economies to the neighborhood level and meet our own needs cooperatively on small scales again? Rebuild community with people we personally know. Relying on politicians, lobbyists and bankers to build our macro- safety net is not the way to go.

Low interest rates may be great for homebuyers, but hell on people trying to save a buck.
Click to expand...

It must be said: the liberal Keynesian macroeconomic platform viciously punishes savers by promoting debt and consumerism with deep deficits, loose monetary policies (ZIRP/QE) and welfarism. Liberals should be divided about this the way conservatives are divided between Republicanism and libertarianism.
 
Last edited:
Neomalthusian said:
So why don't we organize and relocalize our economies to the neighborhood level and meet our own needs cooperatively on small scales again? Rebuild community with people we personally know. Relying on politicians, lobbyists and bankers to build our macro- safety net is not the way to go. It must be said: the liberal Keynesian macroeconomic platform viciously punishes savers by promoting debt and consumerism with deep deficits, loose monetary policies (ZIRP/QE) and welfarism. Liberals should be divided about this the way conservatives are divided between Republicanism and libertarianism.
Click to expand...
Because national and global power and economic structures are heavily organized against it. Local power should be asserted wherever possible, but it isn't viable at this juncture.
 
Morality Games said:
Because national and global power and economic structures are heavily organized against it. Local power should be asserted wherever possible, but it isn't viable at this juncture.
Click to expand...

So we have no choice but to succumb to national and global power structures?

Weak.

Apparently we need to become a lot more oppressed than we are yet before we'll mix **** up.

We don't need local power to defeat national/global power. We simply need local resourcefulness to ignore and forego all the "help" the globalists are "so kindly" offering.
 
Last edited:
Neomalthusian said:
So we have no choice but to succumb to national and global power structures?

Weak.

Apparently we need to become a lot more oppressed than we are yet before we'll mix **** up.

We don't need local power to defeat national/global power. We simply need local resourcefulness to ignore and forego all the "help" the globalists are "so kindly" offering.
Click to expand...

National and global power structures give us a lot of crap, but they also gave us the Information Age and all of its luxories. It is hard to resist the hedonistic impulses that rule our species. It is difficult to imagine any given county or state in the United States could on its own generate enough capital or demand to support Apple or Microsoft and rapid technological advancement.
 
Last edited:
Neomalthusian said:
If you look over the course of a hundred years or more, you'll see people used to be a lot poorer, with much lower standard of living, and yet were much more independent in meeting their own needs. Wages may have stagnated or dropped in real terms, but the standard of living has been increasing at the same time. Compare today's working poor to the poor homesteaders of 150 years ago, and the difference in technology and the lack of any social safety net reveals the poor back then were unfathomably worse off and yet were more independent in meeting their needs (out of necessity). This leads me to wonder if the poor might actually NOT die en masse in the streets if the social safety net went away, rather they would simply return to a standard of living we haven't seen among our poor for a hundred years or more.



This suggests criticism of our monetary policies. Could it be that we agree that our monetary policies suck?



Maybe it's both. Maybe it's really difficult to resist living at the edge of your means when technology kicks as much ass as it does today, plus with a widening social safety net, maybe it removes the fear of failure a bit?
Click to expand...

You don't think the poor were dying in the streets 100 years ago? Of course they were and the wealthy merely stepped around them. They were used to it, it made them feel superior and some want to get used to it again. Humans can be amazingly heartless and numb to others suffering, that's why we had to have the Govt. step in. The results were the most prosperous nation the Earth has ever seen and we can have it again.
When they had a problem with pickpockets at public executions the French took to guillotining them. The problem was there were still pickpockets working the crowd then too. Fear of negative penalties no matter how harsh is not a effective limiter of unwanted behavior.
 
Last edited:
Got that one right.
obvious Child said:
You're relatively new here, so let me explain.

Whatever Navy predicts, the exact opposite will happen. He's so wrong on predictions that the reverse of his predictions he gives are virtually ironclad in coming true.

Also, T-15 minutes. Last I checked the news, Boehner and Reid aren't talking. Therefore, no deal is going on. Therefore, shutdown is coming.
Click to expand...
 
This will never happen....right?
 
mak2 said:
Got that one right.
Click to expand...


Yeah I was wrong when I predicted President Bush would win two terms and that the Republicans would kick ass in the 2006 midterms...:lamo Keep drinking the kool aide My far out left wing friend.
 
obvious Child said:
You call military being paid with IOUs not a shutdown? The entire national parks being offline not a shutdown? 80% of NASA going home? 800,000 civilian military contractors not working not a shutdown?

You are wrong. As usual, man up for once in your life.
Click to expand...

My clueless left wing friend, the military got paid and it wasn't and IOU and so did I.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom