I really hate that the media has labeled this a government shut down.<p>Is the NSA going to stop spying on us?
Are they still printing money?
Are corporate subsidies still proceeding as normal?
Will they stop taxing us?
Will they stop giving out checks to the military industrial complex?
Will they stop military attacks? Will we still be felt up at airports?
Are they still going to throw people behind bars for illegal plants?<p>The reality is that all of the worst parts of the government are still running.
We all spend so much time focusing on the Federal Government but I doubt many of us will even notice the "shut down."<p>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 very cornerstones of modern society.<p>It really gives you an appreciation for what the state and local governments accomplish.
>The bigger issue, he [Vanguard Group Chief Economist Joseph Davis] said, is how much the turmoil raises the “Uncertainty Tax” on the U.S. economy. Policy uncertainty, Davis argues, is already keeping U.S. economic growth down around 2%, when it could be 3% a year.<p>This is what captures my frustration as well.<p>It's infuriating that a faction of Tea Partiers is causing such instability. Having campaigned on a promise of doing <i>anything</i> to stop ObamaCare, they've already played their (reckless) hand.<p>This is bringing a hatchet where you need a scalpel; "ObamaCare" will still go into effect no matter what, and this does nothing more than score political points at the expense of the nation's health.<p>This is precisely why people hate and subsequently tune out to politics - an unfortunate and dangerous reality.
How significant is this though? A quick wikipedia search shows the government has shut down 18 times (including this one) since 1976.<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdown#Federal_government" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdown#Federal_gov...</a><p>In fact, the government shut down almost <i>every</i> year from 1976 to 1987 (only missing 1980 and 1985).
Slightly off topic, but this shutdown is one of those times where I got a very different perspective simply by reading about it from a non-US based (Al Jazeera) source. It is not that they write anything different than local sources, but the whole situation seems way sillier when I think about how this must look to people outside of the country.
I'm glad this was posted here, otherwise I never would have known.<p>Something all hackers should be paying attention to, certainly. Many implications for how we write our software, the future of networked communication and more.
Isn't there anything in the US constitution to break deadlocks? In Australia if the government can't get a bill through the senate, they can try again in 3 months and if it still doesn't go through then it can be used a trigger to dismiss the house of reps and the senate and call a new election.
All the news sites in the world to choose from and the one that hits the front page is the one with interstitials before articles and broken, ugly design?
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).<p>The Democrat narrative has at least three elements:<p>(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.<p>So much of the media has ignored the Republican narrative:<p>(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.<p>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.
This is really depressing. The system seems to be designed to be strong but not infallible, with the assumptions that the people trusted to run the government would do so competently with the best interests of the nation. It seems clear that a slow process of radicalization has replaced the interests of the nation with the interests of the party and it's unclear how to fix it.<p>If one group defects to block voting and no compromise the other side has to also defect or be run over. This is the prisoner's dilemma writ large, only we citizens are the ones paying the penalty for dual defection.
So like 1% of the Federal government (by spending, just making this number up) is going to be closed.<p>National parks, EPA, WIC, and Housing and Urban Dev.<p>99% of the federal government (by spending) will remain open, including:<p>US Military, Food stamps, Unemployment benefits, Social Security benefits, TSA, air traffic control, border patrol, Federal Reserve, and the Post Office.<p><a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/30/227884483/the-shutdown-a-guide-to-what-would-and-wouldnt-close" rel="nofollow">http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/30/227884483...</a>
It seems to me that if it was illegal to combine unrelated subject into a single vote/bill government would run much smoother.<p>No "pork" or pet projects (you'd have to vote separately on each). You could add ACA provisions to this government spending bill since they are unrelated, so there would be no shutdown.<p>Since it's hard to define "unrelated" make it so that if 1/3 of the members vote that it's unrelated, then it's unrelated and has to voted on separately.
I hope they get it started back up soon. I was hoping to visit some National Parks later in the month. (Not being sarcastic here.)<p>This brinkmanship is a travesty.
why is this a bad thing? less spending on something pretty much everyone agrees is bloated is bad? it's like saying morbidly obese person has slightly less access to food. every person in the media seems to assume this is a bad thing. i say this is a good thing. if we can't agree on how money should be spent, it's better that it not get spent at all.
I remember a couple years back reading somewhere (I tried and failed to find the article) that the Treasury Department's software wasn't actually prepared to stop the automatic generation of checks and payments if the debt ceiling was hit. This was for the first time that there was a "crisis" under Obama, so I would imagine that it's been solved.
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.<p>Here's reality:<p>Obamacare is a complete disaster. Don't take my word for it, go research what unions are saying, what businesses are doing an go figure out what you will have to pay and what you'll get for it.<p>This horrible law needs to be repealed.<p>We need a budget. Apparently we have not had one since 2008 or thereabouts. I guess when you have a president who isn't even qualified to run a cookie baking operation this is what we get. It is an absolute disgrace that we are plunging this country deeper and deeper into debt.<p>Finally, Congress has failed to provide our country with responsible governance for decades. Party affiliation does not matter here. It has devolved it into nothing less than a circus. Given that we are locked into this system of government the only conclusion one can reach is that we are doomed.<p>This govenrment shutdown isn't a problem, no matter how much of an economic impact it might make. Over the next 25 to 50 years this economic impact will be absolutlely dwarfed by the devastation that will be caused by the layers of irresponsible actions we will have to live with.<p>I say: Go for it! I hope people understand why it is important to take the pain now in order to right the ship for generations to come.
[not my quote...but relevant]<p>In essence, America has told the world that as long as the business of this country is functioning, your wealth, as represented in Marks, Yen, Pesos, etc. is backed with performing US debt. It's like saying, "as long as your neighbor, next door, does not loses his job, you will not lose all your money!
Well, Obama and his Administration finally made a 4th quarter, last ditch effort -- after reading the polling tea leaves -- to appear as if they have a spine.<p>However, I think both parties may be surprised in the next elections to find just how much in disgust the U.S. public holds them.<p>That is, if the voters that put them there can finally remove their heads from their asses.<p>A primary responsibility of government is a certain degree of stability and predictability. We haven't had that in years.<p>As for the yahoos in D.C. I'm very tired of their self-serving "tantrums". Fuck them all.
Let's keep track of what technology related services get shut down. Please reply here.<p>For animal lovers out there, contrary to reports, the National Zoo's PandaCam is still operational (as I type), so enjoy while you can!<p><a href="http://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/webcams/giant-panda.cfm" rel="nofollow">http://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/webcams/giant-panda.cfm</a>
Even with all the money being printed by Fed (>80 <i>billion</i> usd per month!) there is not enough money for the biggest military+police government on Earth.