Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Government: Sorry, We're Closed

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the that-time-of-year dept.

Government 1532

theodp writes "CNN reports that the U.S. government shut down at 12:01 a.m. EDT Tuesday after lawmakers in the House and the Senate could not agree on a spending bill to fund the government. Federal employees who are considered essential will continue working. But employees deemed non-essential — close to 800,000 — will be furloughed, and most of those are supposed to be out of their offices within four hours of the start of business Tuesday."

cancel ×

1532 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fucking idiots (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999235)

Do they do ANYTHING for the actual good of the country?

Re:Fucking idiots (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999323)

War on Afganistan
War on Iraq
War on terror
War on drugs
War on swear words
War on nudity

Re:Fucking idiots (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999405)

War on it's own citizens

Re:Fucking idiots (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999445)

War on my sanity

Re:Fucking idiots (2)

Cryacin (657549) | about a year ago | (#44999543)

Make war, not love. (It's more profitable)

Re:Fucking idiots (1)

ksemlerK (610016) | about a year ago | (#44999441)

War on Christmas

Re:Fucking idiots (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999485)

War on common sense - I think we actually won that one...

Re:Fucking idiots (5, Insightful)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#44999335)

Passing a yearly budget would prevent this from happening. But then of course they would have to admit that they aren't actually passing budgets anymore.

Re:Fucking idiots (4, Insightful)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year ago | (#44999447)

Well, it would limit it to happening once a year, when they're hammering out the budget.

Re:Fucking idiots (1, Insightful)

Sollord (888521) | about a year ago | (#44999501)

Well what do you expect no one in either party wants to negotiate they want to make media spectacles for the 2014 elections. There is no middle ground anymore theres the far left and the far right and a giant gulf in the middle with a few real centrists mixed in. Just about everyone on here will want to blame the Republicans but in reality it takes two tango and the Democrats don't want to negotiate they want to use the shut down as a political tool to improve there chances to take back the house in 2014 same with the Republicans and the Senate. We'd be better off with a slim majority republican house and senate so they can't override vetoes forcing them to negotiate with the president and dems there by making the government work as intended via checks and balances and no having one party with majorities in both chambers and the presidency is not a good thing as both parties have abused it everytime it happens.

Re:Fucking idiots (-1, Flamebait)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year ago | (#44999539)

Well what do you expect no one in either party wants to negotiate they want to make media spectacles for the 2014 elections.

Sure doesn't help when the president says I'll refuse to pass anything unless it's exactly what I want. Followed with "I will not compromise"(though this doesn't apparently apply to various terrorist groups he's now funneling money to. And it doesn't apparently count since he's just rescinded the child-soldier bill either.

Oddly enough there is middle ground, the only problem is the democrats aren't listening to the people. The republicans are, my bet that regardless of what happens come 2014 there will be a lot of democrats looking for work, especially since some 70 odd percent are now against the ACA.

Re:Fucking idiots (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999369)

Do they do ANYTHING for the actual good of the country?

Short answer: no.

Long answer: noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Re:Fucking idiots (-1)

pecosdave (536896) | about a year ago | (#44999419)

Shutting down was a good thing.

Let's see if they can stay shut down.

Re:Fucking idiots (4, Funny)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#44999489)

I'm starting a pool.

$1 to buy in. All those who guess how many days this lasts (including weekends) get to split 84% of the pot.

Hey... the house has to have a cut. That's the way Wall Street does it.

Wait... no, it isn't. I get a fee of 5% of the dollar as it goes in, 16% of the overall pot, then 5% of the remainder when it's paid out.

There. That's better. If you want a cheaper deal, next time ask for a "no load" pool.

American Exceptionalism and Moral Superiority (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999425)

Yes, I do! I find itÂquite amusingÂthat America was schooled by Putin on exceptionalism.

For a country one who claims to boast its own nationalÂexceptionalismÂandÂmoral superiority. Yet, forgets to mention they are the holders of the largest national debt known to man. If you ask me. I find this factÂhardlyÂexceptionalÂorÂsuperiorÂ... heck it'snotÂevenÂmoral!

Re:Fucking idiots (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about a year ago | (#44999479)

No. DC has been a bad investment for decades now.. The only people they seem to pay off for are the fortune 100, with the rest of us picking up the tab. Talk about a rip off.

What happens to non-essential staff? (3, Interesting)

Open River (3182447) | about a year ago | (#44999243)

Do they receive other benefits? Bummer being sent home in the run-up to the holiday season.

Re:What happens to non-essential staff? (5, Informative)

Guest316 (3014867) | about a year ago | (#44999327)

They're free to do whatever, as long as they're ready to return to work with only a day's notice. Then they get paid for all the time they were out of work once the budget's resolved. It's basically a paid vacation, except you don't get paid until it's over, and you can't really travel out-of-area. Source: Was furloughed during Clinton's reign.

Re:What happens to non-essential staff? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999461)

This isn't true. There is no guarantee that furloughed workers will be paid for their time upon their return.

Re:What happens to non-essential staff? (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about a year ago | (#44999337)

I guess they will have to look for other jobs.

Re:What happens to non-essential staff? (5, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#44999449)

Do they receive other benefits? Bummer being sent home in the run-up to the holiday season.

It's worth mentioning that House and Senate representatives and President - and perhaps at least some of their staff - are considered "essential" and will get paid through the shut down.

Priorities (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999249)

So how about diverting some NSA domestic spying funds to keep retirees from going hungry?

Re:Priorities (4, Funny)

kthreadd (1558445) | about a year ago | (#44999347)

Are you suggesting that preventing terrorism is not essential?

Re:Priorities (4, Insightful)

pahles (701275) | about a year ago | (#44999381)

Has this "preventing terrorism" lead to anything up until now?

Re:Priorities (5, Funny)

narcc (412956) | about a year ago | (#44999481)

Well, I don't see any terrorists around, so it must be working!

It's just like the rock I keep on my nightstand to ward off tigers. Sure, it's not a recurring cost, like the war on terror, but it has a similar effect.

Proof for you naysayers: I've yet to be so much as scratched by a tiger in my sleep.

Re:Priorities (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999409)

Maybe keeping retirees from going hungry would prevent terrorism. Or can you guarantee that not a single hungry retiree will turn into a terrorist?

Retirees (2)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | about a year ago | (#44999483)

Retiree checks will continue to go out on schedule.

That's weird... (2, Insightful)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#44999257)

...I don't feel any different at all.

Re:That's weird... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999343)

You will if it continues.

Re:That's weird... (0)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#44999491)

No, I'm pretty sure I wont.

The Blame Game (5, Insightful)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | about a year ago | (#44999259)

All the news stories have been about "which political party should we blame."

You want to know who to blame? All of the twits who have been cheering on "their team" while this has been going on, instead of pressuring their representatives to do their job. The members of Congress -- in both major parties -- feel no pressure to actually resolve the situation, because they've managed to trick their supporters in the media into giving them a pass while they wasted time instead of actually trying to come up with a solution that has a chance of working.

Re:The Blame Game (1)

idunham (2852899) | about a year ago | (#44999313)

If only I hadn't just used up all my mod points!
(I note that "Congress" strictly speaking means both the House of Representatives and the Senate.)

Of course, that is blameworthy only if you agree that the issues the two parties raise are less important than the budget...

Re:The Blame Game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999459)

Yeah, I think that's hardwired into us, to factionalize. In Roman times we had plebians and patricians, not to mention the Blue and Green chariot racing teams, whose fans would draw their opponents' blood at times. People are just designed to draw lines in the sand, get used to it.

Re:The Blame Game (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999321)

Blaming both parties means blaming nobody. Open your damn eyes.

Re:The Blame Game (5, Insightful)

nbauman (624611) | about a year ago | (#44999453)

Blaming both parties means blaming nobody. Open your damn eyes.

That's what Paul Krugman, the Nobel laureate and NYT columnist says. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html [nytimes.com] He calls it "false equivalence."

Its purpose is to make people feel cynical and hopeless, so that they won't participate in politics and the plutocrats with the big money can take over.

The Democrats are pretty bad. The Republicans are fucking lunatics who are willing to destroy the country in order to serve their Koch brothers billionaires. They're even willing to destroy themselves, because they don't understand what they're doing. They're like the guy who saws off the tree limb he's sitting on.

Re:The Blame Game (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999363)

The members of Congress -- in both major parties -- feel no pressure to actually resolve the situation, because they've managed to trick their supporters in the media into giving them a pass while they wasted time instead of actually trying to come up with a solution that has a chance of working.

Normally, you'd be right, but not this time. The House tried to negotiate with the Senate. In the end they sent something like three or four different versions of a bill to prevent a shutdown. The Senate rejected all of them, refusing to negotiate at all.

You're right, when both sides refuse to compromise, both sides are to blame, but that wasn't the case, for once. The Republicans were willing to bend. The Democrats weren't.

There's no way you can honestly hold anyone to blame but the Democrats in the Senate. This one is cut and dry.

Re:The Blame Game (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999377)

That's just B.S. The house wasn't sending a budget bill to the senate, they were trying to subvert the democratic process by transforming an appropriations bill into a way to attack Obamacare.

They've tried 50 times to vote it out, and since that hasn't worked they've just gone ahead and tried to backdoor it.

Re:The Blame Game (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999407)

You're an idiot, you know that? The House of Representatives represents the will of the people. The people want to get rid of Obamacare. By not listening to their constituents and not backing down on Obamacare, it's the Democrat controlled Senate that's subverting the democratic process.

The Republicans tried to negotiate with the Democrats on this. The Democrats refused. It's that simple.

Re:The Blame Game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999465)

The poeple don't want Obamacare? Then how come for three national elections they've elected the people who said there were going to and then did put it in place?

You do realize how even the _GOP controlled_ house can pass a bill to repeal it right?

Pull your head out of your ass man.

Re:The Blame Game (4, Interesting)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | about a year ago | (#44999529)

No, the house of representatives represents the will of the gerrymanderers. Theres a reason why the senate and president are Democrat controlled, while the House is republican controlled. Heres a hint: The republicans redrew district lines to increase republican votes!

Re:The Blame Game (1)

MrBigInThePants (624986) | about a year ago | (#44999535)

Which people are these?

You bandy around the term "people" as if everyone was a clone and believed the same thing.

Maybe at your yokel faux news watching church group that is true.

But the world out beyond the cornfields is a complicated place....

Re:The Blame Game (4, Insightful)

Comen (321331) | about a year ago | (#44999549)

WTF? No this was a vote about the debt ceiling, not about Obama Care. Bush raised the debt ceiling 7 times without this kind of BS.
The very thought that the Republicans would play chicken at all with an economy that is trying to come back from a collapse is fucking totally ridiculous.
The people voted Obama back in to office with Romney running against Obama Care, they lost! and since then have tried everything they can to stop it, threating to shutdown the government was just another way of them not wanting to admit they lost the election and therefore do not get to overturn the presidents landmark Health care bill.
This was nothing more than Republicans hoping they could force the president to overturn Obama Care by holding the economy hostage, pure and simple. I do not see how any rational person would see this any other way. They should have voted to raise the debt ceiling for no other reason than that's what they are there for.

Re:The Blame Game (5, Insightful)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | about a year ago | (#44999385)

Bullshit

The Republicans are holding the budget hostage as a last resort to prevent a law that legally passed from taking hold (The Affordable HealthCare Act). They've been bitching and moaning for years about it, and now that its time for the majority of the law to go into effect, they decide that if they can't get their way (defunding the law) then NOBODY can have a budget

Re:The Blame Game (4, Insightful)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#44999463)

Okay. So I demand you give me $60, and you say no. So I demand you give me $30, and you still say no. I was willing to bend, you weren't. Why won't you compromise with $30? I'll even be nice and drop it to $15. It's cut and dry that it's your fault we can't compromise and move on.

Re:The Blame Game (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999367)

Are you kidding me? Let me summarize the situation:

* The Senate passes a bill to continue federal funding as required
* The House passes a bill that also kills Obamacare completely
* The Senate rejects it
* The House passes a bill that delays Obamacare for a year, kills the medical device tax, and kills women's contraception coverage
* The Senate rejects it
* The House passes a bill that kills the individual mandate (the only thing that would make Obamacare work)
* The Senate rejects it
* The government shuts down

Here's the strategy of the Republicans: shut down the government and then threaten to default (this happens on Oct 17th if the debt ceiling isn't raised). The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Re:The Blame Game (4, Informative)

nbauman (624611) | about a year ago | (#44999493)

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html [nytimes.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html [nytimes.com]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/ [nytimes.com]

Re:The Blame Game (1, Insightful)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#44999507)

As long as people keep paying their taxes, the federal government has plenty of income to service the debt, and even pay most entitlements. Default does not mean what you think it means.

Re:The Blame Game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999375)

Is the attack on Syria still on ????

Re:The Blame Game (1)

borcharc (56372) | about a year ago | (#44999387)

Its all of our faults for electing them again

Re:The Blame Game (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#44999471)

Its all of our faults for electing them again

Well... whoever ordered the Tea and Crackers for dinner instead of something more substantial. :-)

Re:The Blame Game (3, Insightful)

MrBigInThePants (624986) | about a year ago | (#44999551)

Never a truer word was spoken...

A country does not always get the government it needs, but it always gets the one it deserves....

The "people" need to stop pretending they are not to blame for this.

Re:The Blame Game (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999417)

Bullshit. I blame the ones who have manufactured this situation. You know that this isn't a "real" crisis, right? It's only a crisis because the Republicans in the house caused it. The blame is squarely on them.

Re:The Blame Game (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999431)

Well it's tempting to applaud your sentiment, and in general I think my friends and family are blind to the many wrongs -- including what I'd call unprosecuted war crimes in the form of double tap strikes -- of Democrats, this particular situation is entirely a recent invention of Republicans. One party using these procedures to try to repeal laws that they already failed to stop from passing is relatively rare historically, but is becoming extremely common amongst recent Republicans. It's a move utterly lacking legitimacy, which is why the only reasonable response is a polite "fuck off." Anything else damages the legislative branch; nearly all laws could be easily undermined.

Re:The Blame Game (1)

pecosdave (536896) | about a year ago | (#44999437)

You mean, rallying behind wedge issues during elections instead of paying attention to what matters has consequences!?!?

You know this makes America ... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999263)

... the laughing stock of the western world, right? No other country has such an idiotic system (or as much partisan bickering).

Re:You know this makes America ... (3, Insightful)

50000BTU_barbecue (588132) | about a year ago | (#44999273)

Oh you were that long before this.

Re:You know this makes America ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999315)

You've obviously never heard of Italy.

Re:You know this makes America ... (-1, Troll)

Brett Buck (811747) | about a year ago | (#44999319)

Then I guess whatever country you are from is going to stop asking for handouts from Uncle Sugar, right?

Re:You know this makes America ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999345)

MY country was offered money by the U.S. after a certain earthquake, and REFUSED the offer.

Re:You know this makes America ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999451)

You put self in cabala by accepting those moneyz. it was better idea not to accept USA money than you think.

Re:You know this makes America ... (4, Insightful)

someone1234 (830754) | about a year ago | (#44999359)

My parents warned me about strangers offering candies. They never mean well.

It's all about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999265)

It's all about keeping the unemployment down and helping the economy by cutting our government spending. OPEN YOUR EYES!

Hang on to your wallets! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999271)

They are coming for more money. Your money. They are going to scare it out of you. Country is closed. Government is shut down. Crime is everywhere. End of the world. Blah, blah, blah.

Re:Hang on to your wallets! (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#44999339)

When are they *not* coming for more money?

Every single November there is another "we need to fund education" bill that asks for more money to spend on education. Your state may be similar.

I understand the difference between state and federal, but in this case "they" refers to the same thing.

Re:Hang on to your wallets! (4, Interesting)

nbauman (624611) | about a year ago | (#44999519)

When are they *not* coming for more money?

You are not old enough to remember a time when you could go to a local government-funded university, like City College or U California, and get a college education basically free, without going $40,000 into debt.

Sometimes the government collects taxes and uses it to pay for government services that are worth far more to the taxpayer than the cost of the taxes; sometimes government wastes the money.

It's the job of an intelligent citizen to figure out which is which, not to cynically demonize government and shut it all down.

Obvious but baffling that it's not done yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999275)

What does it take to finally declare the Tea Party lunatics the terroristic organisation they are? They are not mildly insane like most modern GOPs, just full blown clinically insane. You can discuss with the Taliban, Kim Jong Un and Putin, with tea baggers... not so much.

Re: Obvious but baffling that it's not done yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999351)

An idiot you are.

This is not about political parties. It's about politicians.

There are two sides. There are the politicians and the general public. That's ALL there is.

If you think "your" party gives a DAMN about you, then you're delusional.

Re:Obvious but baffling that it's not done yet (0)

Pino Grigio (2232472) | about a year ago | (#44999371)

Well, looking at the US deficit and debt, one could argue that the Tea Party might be loonies but at least it isn't their policy to spend their grandchildren's earnings.

US deficit and debt. (1)

anubi (640541) | about a year ago | (#44999487)

This is no joke. Have a look at this. Kinda scary....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cumulative_Current_Account_Balance.png [wikipedia.org]

You have to scroll down to the very bottom to see the Good Ole USA... The scariest thing to me of all is not that are we at the bottom... its just how much in the hole we are... and this "benefit" appears to have been granted us because the other countries still accept the US Dollar as a world reserve currency.

Re:US deficit and debt. (2)

Pino Grigio (2232472) | about a year ago | (#44999531)

Well, I don't know what the theory is and to be honest, I'm not sure I'm entitled to an opinion being from the UK, not the US. It's up to you how you run your government. But it seems to me that whatever you're doing at the moment cannot be sustained indefinitely. Someone, at some point, has to start cutting.

Someone woke up at last? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999279)

Perhaps they realized finally that they need to stop spending money they don't have? Perhaps not what I would have selected as the first cut.

Just like the NSA Spy Ring (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999283)

I am not surprised about this either. Let me guess, the congressmen get to keep their income too.

Is this? (0)

mybeat (1516477) | about a year ago | (#44999287)

Game Over Man, GAME OVER!

They say they'll shut it down but they NEVER DO! (3, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about a year ago | (#44999295)

Quoting a post on the Daily Paul:

When they have a "government shutdown" they DON'T shut it down!

They don't fire the bureaucrats. They might send some home and hold back some of their pay - but they make it up afterward. They have some of them come in and give back pay to the others later, after they "restart". They still arrest people. They still run courts. They still bust people for breaking their laws and regulations when the "crime" occurs during the so-called "shutdown". They still tax us on any work we do during the "shutdown", any money we make, and the money they CLAIM we made when the currency inflates between the time we buy and then sell something. And on, and on, and on.

No matter how much we WISH they'd actually SHUT IT DOWN AND GO AWAY, leaving us to take care of our own problems and run our own lives, they never do.

Promise them anything but give them tyranny. It's right in character. It's just like the way they break ALL their promises, whether it's campaign, effects of new laws, government programs, ...

Re:They say they'll shut it down but they NEVER DO (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | about a year ago | (#44999397)

Because what we really need is anarchy, right? No way that could end badly.

Re:They say they'll shut it down but they NEVER DO (1)

Shimbo (100005) | about a year ago | (#44999421)

Quoting a post on the Daily Paul:

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

Re:They say they'll shut it down but they NEVER DO (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999525)

You're right. I prefer the Nightly Kiera.

What a great way to run a country... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999297)

'Murica! Where the government closes when they can't talk it out due to childish behavior from different parties.

Third World Governance (5, Interesting)

Freshly Exhumed (105597) | about a year ago | (#44999301)

I love Slate's [slate.com] take on this. When you read it, substitute "Venezuela", "Uganda", or "Myanmar" for "America".

Lawmakers should be considered non-essential (4, Insightful)

Barnoid (263111) | about a year ago | (#44999325)

If lawmakers of both houses were considered non-essential we wouldn't have a shut down right now.
It's all fun and games as long as you can play with someone else's income.

Not really (3, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a year ago | (#44999423)

While some congressmen need their salary, most don't. You generally have to be fairly monied to make it that far in politics, meaning that the pay isn't a big deal. Also the lack of pay is something of a hollow threat as in all cases I know of, they authorized pay for employees retroactively after the shutdown.

That aside, if they were furloughed, they'd be prohibited from working meaning prohibited from resolving the situation.

A more effective solution would be to force them to work. Something like in the event of a shutdown they are required to stay in Washington and be in session 12 hours a day, 7 days a week until it is resolved. I think that would be more likely to work.

However, it is all academic since congress would be the ones who'd have to make that law (barring an amendment) so it won't happen.

Re:Not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999513)

Maybe without their staff they'd forget how to pass a law. [youtube.com]

Oh no! (5, Funny)

Kohath (38547) | about a year ago | (#44999333)

The people who steal one third of my paycheck! Who will spy on me? Who will treat me with contempt? Who will give my money to people who don't work? Who will blow up those nasty foreigners with drones? Who will second-guess my personal choices?

And what about the cronies!!? How will they get their schemes funded? Won't someone please think of the cronies!!!?

Re:Oh no! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999429)

I bet NSA staff will be considered essential, so you do not have to worry about not being spied upon.

P.S.: Yes, I do have an account. But some things are best posted as AC, never know who is listening in.

Re:Oh no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999473)

don't worry, those are essential services that will continue.. and in the case of three letter agencies.. they have additional budgets that don't go through congress, so they, and their operations, are largely unaffected.

Re:Oh no! (1)

Moofie (22272) | about a year ago | (#44999509)

Oh, you thought any of that was going to stop? You're adorable.

No, the only things that are going to stop are the ones Republicans don't like.

Looking in from the outside. (4, Insightful)

gallondr00nk (868673) | about a year ago | (#44999355)

Sorry, but the way the US political class appear to act is absolutely fucking pathetic.

Re:Looking in from the outside. (4, Funny)

Memroid (898199) | about a year ago | (#44999393)

Sorry, but the way the US political class appear to act is absolutely fucking pathetic.

Thanks for this insightful outside perspective; our beer goggles must be deceiving us.

Laughing at cows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999357)

HA HA - "Nelson"

Since we've reached this point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999365)

Can one side or the other toss the debt limit into the whole debate so we can skip that argument too?

I know, wishful thinking.

Thanks (2)

frovingslosh (582462) | about a year ago | (#44999399)

Thank goodness that we don't get all of the government that we're paying for.

Morons in charge... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999435)

What kills me is the assholes who are responsible for this shutdown... The senators and congress...
THEY STILL GET PAID! FOR FAILING AT THEIR JOBS!
How fucked up is that...

We have such morons in charge...
Lets take away their pay for the year. They have failed at their jobs.

How Australia handles this (5, Interesting)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year ago | (#44999439)

If this happens in Australia (upper house repeatedly blocks bills from the lower house) we sack them all, and hold another election. It's called a double dissolution [wikipedia.org] (because both houses are dissolved simultaneously).

Easy, kill the TSA... (2, Informative)

advocate_one (662832) | about a year ago | (#44999443)

and stop giving billions of your tax dollars to the Israelis... In one fell swoop, your party would ride back in on a massive wave of goodwill as the TSA goons who make life such a misery would have been consigned to the dustbin of history...

huh.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999467)

in the private sector, "non-essential" employees don't have a job for very long.. in the public sector, they get paid vacations.

I, for one, welcome the lack of overlords. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999469)

Maybe the People can get stuff done, now.

The mechanics were (are?) interesting. (5, Informative)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | about a year ago | (#44999475)

I was there for the last shutdown.

By statute, email was not sufficient for notification. Every employee had to show up to the office and be given a formal-on-paper memo telling them they were furloughed. Remember, by statute, the in-person delivery of a notice on paper was required. That meant that *every* field employee had to make there way back to the office the same morning to receive their paper. Special Agents were called off of stake-outs. Employees permamently assigned to work from home or from desks at non-government entities had to leave their normal workspace and come into the federal building that was, theoretically, their place of employment...even if they *never* set foot in that building under normal circumstances.

At the last shutdown, every federal building was packed. There wasn't room for all the people who were forced to show up all at the same time. Halls were lined with people standing around because they had no place to sit. Friends gathered in groups of 4 or 5 around the desk of the one guy in their group who actually had a desk.

All of this may have been changed in the meantime.

However, post-9/11 we used to discuss the prospect of another shutdown and always concluded the same. Congress would be stupid to do it. The mechanics of the process made every federal building in the nation an incredibly enticing, super-target-rich environment for any nut job with a bomb or a gun who wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.

We tended to think that putting all government employees in central locations, metaphorically under a giant banner that said "All terrorists attack here. Multiple high-value targets present. High level of success guaranteed." was so stupid that even Congress wouldn't do it.

Of course, we might have been wrong about that.

Victory! (5, Funny)

solidraven (1633185) | about a year ago | (#44999477)

A victory for the British Empire!

http://www.usgovdownforeveryoneorjustme.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44999499)

So this was inevitable...

http://www.usgovdownforeveryoneorjustme.com

Non-Essential Employees (0)

ksemlerK (610016) | about a year ago | (#44999555)

But employees deemed non-essential — close to 800,000 — will be furloughed

Since they aren't essential, why the hell are they even working there in the first place? If they don't NEED to be there, why are they even kept on? A private enterprize wouldn't keep on staff that isn't essential to the operation of the business, because it is an unnecessary expense that isn't justified. Why should the government be any different? If the government doesn't need to do something, THEN IT SHOULDN'T!!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>