US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages • Hacker News Board

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#391

Post by matt4077 » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:03 PM UTC

usaphp wrote: post #69

As a non US citizen, I don’t understand what’s that shutdown even about, seems like absurd thing to do. Is it all because of Trump or he is not the only one to blame? I remember there was some shutdown when Obama was there too? Or am I mistaken? Edit: downvoted for asking a question?

Why don’t you check Wikipedia or literally any english-language newspaper, instead of sending people on a mission explaining the basics to you? Nothing anybody is going to come up here in two paragraphs or less is going to do the subject justice.

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#392

Post by jrockway » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:03 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #271

flyingpenguin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that really bothers me about that "They should have savings" logic, is the expectation that they should have to use them. Yes. They should have savings. EVERYONE should have min 3 months of income in savings. No one should be expected to use it.

What's the emergency fund for, if not for loss of income? If there is no condition under which you're expected to use it, it's just stranded money...

Typically people do not go to work while living on their emergency fund. That is why it doesn't sit well when we tell the government employees that they should be living off their hard-earned savings while they work for us for free. It's not an emergency, it's madness.

To some extent, people work for the government because of the stability. You are not going to wake up one morning to find that the United States Government is out of business, so an emergency fund seems less essential than if you were working at a startup with 3 employees.

With government work no longer being considered more stable or reliable than the private sector, the one advantage that the government has used to recruit workers and pay them less than average is gone. That means government work is going to go un-done, or they're going to have to start paying employees more to make up for the risk. That only hurts us taxpayers.

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#393

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

posterboy wrote: post #360

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10%+ feels exploitative and predatory. The current fed interest rate is 2.5% - 4x above that is "let's profit on the unfortunate".

If it's short term, you end up paying less than 10% on it. If!

That's true, but the only way you'll be able to pay is if once things are rolling again you have that much extra cash. I don't know how tight people live.

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#394

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

busterarm wrote: post #368

bilbo0s wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness it's not really the finance department and the ceo, it's the ceo and the board locking horns. And the ceo and the board decided to shutdown the whole company until they get their little tiff ironed out. (Which, yeah, was a pretty dumb idea. But the ceo and the board are kind of known for having dumb ideas.)

No, it really is the finance department. Boards vote on the CEO and serve as his advisors and that is certainly not the correct metaphor. More importantly, Congress sets the budget through the House and Senate budget committees, which then draft and pass appropriations bills. This is the point in the process where we are stuck. The President is saying "bring me budget bills that have the things I want and I won't vet…

[deleted]

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#395

Post by Macha » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

mempko wrote: post #344

Macha wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding as an outsider is that I think the problem is with the debt ceiling. Legally the president (who proposes the budget) needs approval from Congress to borrow beyond the debt ceiling. The US government has for quite some time run a budget deficit, so the only budget that can apply would be a budget with significant cuts in government spending. As such, even keeping the existing budget ticking would exce…

The federal government must run a deficit. Balancing the budget would be a disaster for the economy. Watch this short video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LxJW7hl8oqM

Just to be clear, I agree with you. I was just trying to present their argument in as unbiased a manner as I could

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#396

Post by jdhn » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

electrograv wrote: post #298

dawhizkid wrote: post #134

Interesting thing I discovered when I was concerned about SFO delays is that SFO is one of the few airports in the U.S. that does not use TSA for security...it hires its own private security officers. Edit: For those curious, these airports have private security (SFO is by far the largest as far as I can tell): https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/screening-partnerships

Does this mean the airports experiencing a crippling loss of federal personnel could simply hire them onto their own payroll (the same people, even)? In such a case, all airports could keep functioning independent of government aid -- theoretically, anyway.

I'd prefer it to be this way. Airports could hire their own screeners, set their own rules, and they wouldn't be as affected by this shutdown. I think it'd be interesting to have airports do the same thing with air traffic controllers, with both airlines and airports kicking in equal amounts of money to employ and train them.

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#397

Post by rootusrootus » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

Cyph0n wrote: post #194

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reagan outlawed ATC strikes, after firing all of them during a dispute early in his presidency. Early 80s.

I highly doubt that any president would ever dare do that again. It took years for the US to recover...

How many times since early in 2017 have we collectively said something like "I highly doubt that any president would ever dare ..." only to find out that the current occupant of that position has no such qualms?

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#398

Post by taftster » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

akhilcacharya wrote: post #214

bouncing wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a kid, my dad was deciding between two engineering jobs; one for the US Department of Commerce and another in the private sector for a big aerospace contractor. The private sector one paid more, I remember, but my mother brought up to my dad something interesting: You're less likely to get laid off, and you'll always have more job security, with the stable paycheck provided by a government job. It's weird…

If this country was actually run like a business, the CEO would be fired by now.

What's interesting about your statement is, I believe, that's one of the reasons why Trump was elected. There are a certain demographic of people who want our country to be run more like a business. These people likely thought Trump would be able to do so, given his "business acumen".

I'm not sure what the current situation says about this concept, if anything. Maybe the government is its own beast and can't be run like a business at all -- not saying that Trump was the right guy for the job, but wondering if any CEO type would be?

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#399

Post by flatline » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #271

flyingpenguin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that really bothers me about that "They should have savings" logic, is the expectation that they should have to use them. Yes. They should have savings. EVERYONE should have min 3 months of income in savings. No one should be expected to use it.

What's the emergency fund for, if not for loss of income? If there is no condition under which you're expected to use it, it's just stranded money...

Preferably, actual emergencies, not manufactured ones. Property damage/maintenance, healthcare, travel to visit family in an emergency, money to cover expenses if evacuated due to a natural disaster, I can think of more. Certainly job loss fits into this but federal workers are not losing their jobs at this point; it's an untenable situation.

Re: US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

#400

Post by busterarm » Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 5:05 PM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #380

bilbo0s wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness it's not really the finance department and the ceo, it's the ceo and the board locking horns. And the ceo and the board decided to shutdown the whole company until they get their little tiff ironed out. (Which, yeah, was a pretty dumb idea. But the ceo and the board are kind of known for having dumb ideas.)

This is 100% the CEO's decision. Remember, he rejected a perfectly good funding plan that was put forward by his own allies back in December, before his enemies took over the board on January 3.

The President makes budget requests to Congress before the budget committees plan and submit their appropriations bills.

The perfectly good funding plan did not include the budget requests the President made. Whether you agree with his politics or not is immaterial. It is not 100% his decision.