Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years • Hacker News Board

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#101

Post by Steko » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:04 AM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #57

I've actually had time over the past few weeks to spend time watching the various duscussions in the Senate. In other words, I chose to go to the source and take the time to understand rather than get fed a bunch of ideologically loaded bullshit by various news outfits. Here's reality: Obamacare is a complete disaster. Don't take my word for it, go research what unions are saying, what businesses are doing an go figu…

"rather than get fed a bunch of ideologically loaded bullshit by various news outfits.

Here's reality:

"

Take your astroturf back to Fox News.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#102

Post by 001sky » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:05 AM UTC

icambron wrote: post #100

001sky wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's infuriating that a faction of Tea Partiers is causing such instability Why is growth not considered a form of instability? Just curious, last time I looked risk and volatility were agnostic to direction.

Risk is very explicitly directional. E.g. Wikipedia has it as: > Risk is the potential of loss (an undesirable outcome, however not necessarily so) resulting from a given action, activity and/or inaction When was the last time you checked?

Instability is volatility (sigma). check it out.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100630193942AA...

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#103

Post by jarek » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:06 AM UTC

cantrevealname wrote: post #87

jbooth wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One facet of the 'shutdown' is that they're not authorized to hand out federal money to states anymore. The states and municipalities are feeling it for every day that this stupid theatre persists.

If what the state government is doing is useful and wanted, then the state should tax more and the federal government should tax less. This is yet another inefficiency of federal government to act as a middleman.

State politicians and voters in state elections, particularly in states that are net beneficiaries of the federal contributions, are sure to like the idea.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#104

Post by ck2 » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:07 AM UTC

001sky wrote: post #99

mappu wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that compare to how much it costs per day to be open?

1 trillion in red ink

Middle class is virtually gone, so what do you think happens when the vultures circling see that all government protection is gone from their prey?

The red ink is from everything that is still running right now, ie. the military industrial complex.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#105

Post by jMyles » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:07 AM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #24

We all spend so much time focusing on the Federal Government but I doubt many of us will even notice the "shut down." Compare that with what would happen if your local and state governments shut down: Trash would pile up. Criminals would run free in the streets. Fires wouldn't be put out. Water and electricity would stop. Sewage systems would back up. Schools would close. We're talking about services that are the ver…

Or, for students, their student government. For most US College Students, the student government likely makes more important decisions than any other.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#106

Post by hellcow » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:07 AM UTC

asabjorn wrote: post #89

hellcow wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the state and local governments gave sufficient notice, private businesses would snap up the new market opportunities. Everything worthwhile would continue as usual, albeit with less waste.

This needs serious backing as evidence seems to show the opposite. For instance, if we pick firefighting as an example what is there evidence that private firefighting is a good idea? In recent history this kind of thinking have led to disasters like in Tennessee: - http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/t/no-pay-no-spray-firefighters-let-home-burn/#.UkpUgGSidTp and during the 1800s private firefighting w…

By "disasters like in Tennessee," you're referring to a family that lost their home in a fire due to not paying a business for their fire-fighting services.

It's not as if they paid the firefighters, but the firefighters refused to act--if that were the case, there would be a serious civil lawsuit to recoup the cost of the lost home, its sentimental value, and punitive damages.

He didn't pay for fire-fighting. He didn't have enough insurance. And somehow, this is someone else's fault.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#107

Post by scottjad » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:08 AM UTC

What has surprised me about this issue is how so much of the media has automatically adopted the Democrats narrative (especially on point #1, see below). Surprisingly, the media stories covering this shutdown are actually pretty fair in their summary (at least with respect to point #1).

The Democrat narrative has at least three elements:

(1) The House Republicans are unwilling to compromise and will shutdown the government if they can't get rid of Obamacare. (2) This will ruin the economy. (3) America should pay its bills.

So much of the media has ignored the Republican narrative:

(1) Senate Democrats and the President are unwilling to compromise and will shutdown the government if they can't keep all of Obamacare. (2) Excessive government spending hurts the economy. (3) Going deeper into debt is not paying ones bills.

Like I said, surprisingly the latest blurbs about the shutdown actually focus on Congress as a whole not being able to compromise and come to an agreement instead of focusing only on the GOP or Tea Party.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#108

Post by zalzane » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:09 AM UTC

hellcow wrote: post #36

nostromo wrote: post #24

We all spend so much time focusing on the Federal Government but I doubt many of us will even notice the "shut down." Compare that with what would happen if your local and state governments shut down: Trash would pile up. Criminals would run free in the streets. Fires wouldn't be put out. Water and electricity would stop. Sewage systems would back up. Schools would close. We're talking about services that are the ver…

If the state and local governments gave sufficient notice, private businesses would snap up the new market opportunities. Everything worthwhile would continue as usual, albeit with less waste.

Yes, because privatization worked so well for the prison system.

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#109

Post by wpietri » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:10 AM UTC

scottjad wrote: post #95

nhaehnle wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truly positive contribution of a federal government (besides the questionable benefit of military protection) comes in the form of automatic stabilizers for the economy. When there is a shock to the economy, social safety nets dampen the pain significantly. Local and state governments would never be able to provide a reliable social safety net, because they have to operate on the same principles as every other us…

This is basically argumentation by story. You told one of many possible stories as if it was obviously and indisputably true. You provided no support for it. What about all the other plausible stories that you ignored? What if these "stabilizers" (i.e. money creation) are doing more harm than good, or even causing the business cycle? What if social safety hammocks decrease growth? What if welfare provided by prudent…

And argumentation by loaded, leading questions is better because...?

Re: Federal Government Begins First Shutdown In 17 Years

#110

Post by invalidOrTaken » Tue, Oct 01, 2013, 5:10 AM UTC

shmerl wrote: post #94

Can anyone please, explain briefly what are the downsides and practical problems that ACA will cause?

One downside: it shafts young men uninsured through their employers (read: a considerable part of the HN demographic) pretty hard: http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/14/news/economy/obamacare-premi...