Is The Government Shutdown Affecting You Directly?

[jamil]

I'm not sure playing the "blame game" is productive in this scenario.

Sure, all of us - usually - pick our careers/jobs/employment at some level. We need money, we have a particular set of skills, so we go trade our actions for money.

There's an element of choice to that. But at the same time, we all make those decisions based on the factors in our lives. It isn't like we can literally pick whatever we want to do for however much we want to get paid.

There is a finite set of choices (best case) and we pick the best one that makes sense at that time.

Especially now with so many dual income families, the loss of one income may not be the entire story. Can we blame a "keeping up with the Joneses" mentality on part of that, too? Probably. I just don't know how that advances the discussion about whether this gov't shutdown is "good" or "bad."

If **** is going to go the wrong way, I'd rather it would go the wrong way because of bad luck or just the winds blowing the way they do. Before I became a software engineer, my old job went to Mexico. **** happens. I changed careers. What are you gonna do. I like this career way better anyway. But mother****ers playing chicken with my paycheck? I don't care if I have 10 years pay in the bank. That's bull**** year round.

 

[jamil]

You are aware Trump has said he'll continue the shutdown for as long as it takes, right?

At this point, I don't think any of us can predict when .gov will reopen.

It's uncertain. But it takes two sides to make this problem go away. Will Pelosi blink, or will she stick to it? Who knows.

 

[T.Lex]

It's uncertain. But it takes two sides to make this problem go away. Will Pelosi blink, or will she stick to it? Who knows.

Like I just said in another thread, the House can actually pass a bill that would reopen gov't and give some money for the wall. That then smokes out the Senate and POTUS.

Unfortunately, Pelosi can make it look like she's trying to resolve things.

 

[KLB]

I find the funny thing to be that if there are as many never trumper GOP members as are claimed, why haven't they passed a bill will a veto proof majority?

 

[HoughMade]

Like I just said in another thread, the House can actually pass a bill that would reopen gov't and give some money for the wall. That then smokes out the Senate and POTUS.

Unfortunately, Pelosi can make it look like she's trying to resolve things.

Trump should offer up opening the gvt. in exchange for funding some portions of the wall where it could be most useful....before they do.

 

[jamil]

I find the funny thing to be that if there are as many never trumper GOP members as are claimed, why haven't they passed a bill will a veto proof majority?

Nevertrump is so 2016. But I've wondered that too.

 

[HoughMade]

Nevertrump is so 2016. But I've wondered that too.

Because the Republicans can let Trump own shutting down the gvt., but if they pass a "veto-proof" budget, they will own the wall (no wall) being built.

Re-election...

 

[KLB]

Because the Republicans can let Trump own shutting down the gvt., but if they pass a "veto-proof" budget, they will own the wall (no wall) being built.

Re-election...

That flies in the face of nevertrump though.

 

[T.Lex]

I find the funny thing to be that if there are as many never trumper GOP members as are claimed, why haven't they passed a bill will a veto proof majority?

Do you mean GOP members of the Senate that would try to stymie the POTUS?

I think part of that is because the last election run included Trump helping get some of them elected. Even if they think Trump is evil, they know their constituents favor Trump, at least a little.

The more established senators are probably willing to let this play out. Then next senate cycle is kinda the obverse of this past one: a bunch of GOP seats are up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_Senate_elections

22 Republicans to 12 Dems.

Not many of them are willing to go too far out on any limb that might get cut off behind them.

 

[Libertarian01]

The pickle they're in is not getting a paycheck, and many of them having to work anyway and not get paid for who knows how long. It doesn't matter how prepared they are because that's really not my point. This has nothing to do with AOC. It has nothing to do with the younger generation. There's no mindset involved. Government workers aren't an extension of welfare. A government job is not a social entitlement. They took a job from an employer and in return for their work, they get paid salaries and wages. The only differences, their employer is the federal government.

I am not disagreeing that many of the people who can't make even their rent after missing the first paycheck may be in a bigger pickle than most because of their own lack of preparation. But, maybe not. Maybe you nor I know their situation. Maybe life has handed some of them ****. Or maybe they waste their paychecks on blow and hookers. I've always prefaced this with, "to the extent...", so I've already covered the more than 0% and less than 100% stuff. Shouldn't even matter. They're not getting a paycheck because of politics. That sucks and that's not on them. They have zero to do with not getting a paycheck. Would be nice for them if they'd have prepared, but regardless, they're not getting a paycheck that they're owed, when they're owed it.

I shall ignore the personal responsibility issue and go to the "working for no immediate pay" issue. Yes, this sucks. No, I would not want to be in that position. No, they did nothing wrong to contribute to this.

I will push, however, that this is in no way unique to the government shutdown.

In May, 2007, 73,000 GM UAW workers went on strike. Just 73,000 volunteering to strike to get what they wanted. In so doing this cost 80,000 to 100,000 Canadian Auto Workers to go without work or pay as their plants were dependent upon American GM parts that were now not being made.

Also, we think 800,000 workers being affected is bad in today's shutdown? How about thanks to the strike above about 3 million jobs supplying parts were impacted as GM wasn't ordering parts from them, and they weren't ordering parts from their suppliers, and the vendors who stocked the crappy food machines in these plants weren't stocking, etc etc etc. As the article below points out some of the suppliers could possibly go out of business as their margins are very thin and loss of revenue could be a mortal threat if the strike went on for too long.

Link: https://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/news/companies/gm_uaw/

Everyone, everywhere could be imperiled through no fault of their own by someone far away deciding to do something.

Perhaps it isn't a human cause, but a natural disaster? Perhaps a hurricane hits and a factory is destroyed. The loss of parts they supplied for someone else could cost that business their business. The loss of that factory could cost suppliers who supplied them their business, and thus jobs.

As I said in my very first post, I want people to have a job/career they love and enjoy, I really do. But they must also consider that any job they chose will come with benefits and risks that are beyond their control. That is why I believe it is extremely important to control the things we can and to make the best decisions we can based upon reality and not wishful thinking.

Regards,

Doug

 

[jedi]

Trump should offer up opening the gvt. in exchange for funding some portions of the wall where it could be most useful....before they do.

trump does not care about the wall. silly you!

trump cares about 2 things.
making money for him
his popularity

if ya want to defeat trump a 100% media ignore him would kill him. imagine tomorrow now news channel talks about him, congress keeps debating without talking to him or about him. he would die. he lives for being in the spotlight be it by saying vulgar things, doing crazy things or keeping the .gov closed.

but back to the topic. his base loves what he is doing. and since the irs is going to issue refunds but not do audits his base is safe. plus ssa benefits are being paid so again the seniors are ok with this shutdown.

the ones really affected are democrat supports. .gov union workers, welfare people who snap is about to stop as well.

 

[JettaKnight]

I came here to see in any INGO'ers were affected, but I was treated to another political "discussion".

Hooray INGO.



Personally, I was looking for seeing a friend at the 1500, but he had to work (ironic, huh?) to cope with the shutdown.

 

[jamil]

I shall ignore the personal responsibility issue and go to the "working for no immediate pay" issue. Yes, this sucks. No, I would not want to be in that position. No, they did nothing wrong to contribute to this.

I will push, however, that this is in no way unique to the government shutdown.

In May, 2007, 73,000 GM UAW workers went on strike. Just 73,000 volunteering to strike to get what they wanted. In so doing this cost 80,000 to 100,000 Canadian Auto Workers to go without work or pay as their plants were dependent upon American GM parts that were now not being made.

Also, we think 800,000 workers being affected is bad in today's shutdown? How about thanks to the strike above about 3 million jobs supplying parts were impacted as GM wasn't ordering parts from them, and they weren't ordering parts from their suppliers, and the vendors who stocked the crappy food machines in these plants weren't stocking, etc etc etc. As the article below points out some of the suppliers could possibly go out of business as their margins are very thin and loss of revenue could be a mortal threat if the strike went on for too long.

Link: https://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/news/companies/gm_uaw/

Everyone, everywhere could be imperiled through no fault of their own by someone far away deciding to do something.

Perhaps it isn't a human cause, but a natural disaster? Perhaps a hurricane hits and a factory is destroyed. The loss of parts they supplied for someone else could cost that business their business. The loss of that factory could cost suppliers who supplied them their business, and thus jobs.

As I said in my very first post, I want people to have a job/career they love and enjoy, I really do. But they must also consider that any job they chose will come with benefits and risks that are beyond their control. That is why I believe it is extremely important to control the things we can and to make the best decisions we can based upon reality and not wishful thinking.

Regards,

Doug

I still don't think you're getting the point. They're not getting paid because politicians are playing chicken with their paychecks. They need to play chicken with something they both actually care about, and not something that doesn't really affect them. That's why I think a default budget would work. Each year, if a new budget isn't signed into law by a certain date, then a default budget, which is ridiculously low across the board for discretionary spending, automatically goes into effect until a budget is passed.

 

[bwframe]

Nevertrump is so 2016...

That's what the nevertrumpers would like us to think...

 

[cosermann]

No effect.

 

[SwikLS]

This Govt Shutdown has affected me directly.


I paid $1.75/gal. for gas yesterday.

 

[Hawkeye7br]

Nobody is working for no pay. They will get deferred or delayed pay. Furloughed employees will get deferred or delayed pay. That always do. Dems are on the beach in Puerto Rico. Shows how much they care.

 

[jamil]

That's what the nevertrumpers would like us to think...

At least you have a sense of humor about it.

 

[JettaKnight]

Nobody is working for no pay. They will get deferred or delayed pay. Furloughed employees will get deferred or delayed pay.

So, don't work, yet still get paid. That seems like efficient use of tax dollars.

 

[KLB]

I still don't think you're getting the point. They're not getting paid because politicians are playing chicken with their paychecks. They need to play chicken with something they both actually care about, and not something that doesn't really affect them. That's why I think a default budget would work. Each year, if a new budget isn't signed into law by a certain date, then a default budget, which is ridiculously low across the board for discretionary spending, automatically goes into effect until a budget is passed.

They need to just get rid of the vast majority of them.