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!

US Government Shutdown Ends

Soulskill posted 1 year,6 days | from the nobody-surprised,-everybody-irritated dept.

United States 999

An anonymous reader writes "After more than two weeks of bickering that made the schoolyard appear civilized, Congress has finally passed a bill to reopen the U.S. Federal Government. 'The Senate passed the measure by a vote of 81 - 18, followed by approval in the House by a vote of 285 - 144. The bill now goes to the President, who will make remarks on Thursday regarding the reopening of the federal government. ... Earlier in the day, Speaker Boehner conceded that the House would not vote to stop the Senate-negotiated agreement. In a statement, the Speaker said that, after a fight with President Obama over his signature health care law, " . . . blocking the bipartisan agreement reached today by the members of the Senate will not be a tactic for us." The agreement will raise the debt limit until February 2014, fund the government through January 2014 and establish a joint House-Senate committee to make spending cut decisions.' CNN adds, 'Obama, for one, didn't seem in the mood Wednesday night for more of the same -- saying politicians in Washington have to "get out of the habit of governing by crisis." "Hopefully, next time, it will not be in the 11th hour," Obama told reporters, calling for both parties to work together on a budget, immigration reform and other issues. When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"

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

Thank goodness (1, Troll)

MisterSquid (231834) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149677)

Part of does wonder, though, whether this makes the ACA a "done deal" even though it is nowhere near as desirable as a single payer system.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

Rolpa (3036845) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149689)

Depends on your definition of "done deal".

Re:Thank goodness (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149699)

also, your definition of "desireable". it's interesting to hear that it falls short of your ideal. i haven't heard many people state that opinion.

Re:Thank goodness (5, Informative)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149713)

it's interesting to hear that it falls short of your ideal. i haven't heard many people state that opinion.

Its backers accepted a lot of compromises in order to get it out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. A lot of people think the original was somewhere between "substantially better" and "much better".

US Government logic (5, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149741)

Given pro is the opposite of con,

What is the opposite of progress?

Re:US Government logic (-1, Offtopic)

Cryacin (657549) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149793)

Thank you to the guy who instantly marked me as a troll. I sincerely wish that I was trolling, rather than just stating fact.

Re:US Government logic (5, Funny)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149929)

Given pro is the opposite of con,

What is the opposite of progress?

republicans! [raises mod shield]

Re:Thank goodness (5, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149889)

I second his motion. I wanted a single payer system, not a crazy clone of Romneycare.

The fundamental problem is that the actual cost of healthcare is way too high, mostly because a healthy market cannot be established when the option is pay or die and many of the 'customers' come in unconscious. If insurance could fix it, it would have done so in the last several decades.

While Obamacare has addressed some of the issues like 'pre-existing conditions' and rescission, it falls far short of what we really need.

Re:Thank goodness (3, Insightful)

Qzukk (229616) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149945)

If insurance could fix it

Nobody ever scared anyone with tales of $50 ER visits. Who'd buy insurance to cover cheap healthcare?

Re:Thank goodness (4, Interesting)

james.mcarthur (154849) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150027)

Nobody ever scared anyone with tales of $50 ER visits. Who'd buy insurance to cover cheap healthcare?

Australians; we buy insurance to cover the free healthcare.

Re:Thank goodness (5, Insightful)

Vaphell (1489021) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150003)

Lol, insurance used to be very affordable before the govt included health care in tax deductions for employers but not for employees. That alone killed the transparency because there is no market for individuals. That means nobody in the whole system gives a fuck how much things cost. Healthcare user, as long as he has one, doesn't care because he doesn't see the bills, employer doesn't care because it's not his health, hospitals don't care either as it's in their best interest to inflate the costs, so who is supposed to put a downward pressure on prices?
Any 3rd party payment system based on spending someone else's money is prone to suffer from overuse and cost inflation. Yes, in theory it's employee's money because it's his compensation but the difference stems from the fact that the employee doesn't have to kiss the dollars in his possession goodbye. Out of sight, out of mind. If it all happens beyond the curtain, he doesn't feel the money was ever his.

Also insurance is about risk management, but in the current form it's far from that. Huge chunk of the cost is about trivial 'maintenance', yearly checkups, flu, etc. These things should be paid out of pocket and you insurance in the meaning of the word should cover only disasters. Recurring costs 100% certain to happen have nothing to do with risk management. Yes, for that reason insurance is a lousy model in case of preexisting conditions but trying to fit a square peg into a round hole as the ACA tries to do won't work and expect to see increases in prices across the board.

Re:Thank goodness (2)

shentino (1139071) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150011)

If an idea is going to piss off the special interests that got our congress critters elected, it's probably not going to fly.

Re:Thank goodness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150057)

Can I direct your attention to the fact that this "payer" in your desired single payer system was roughly a day away from default? If the latest shutdown should have taught you anything its that the powers that be in Washington have no problems using you as pawns in their game. This time when they threw a tantrum they closed National Parks. What will they do next time when they control your healthcare?

Re:Thank goodness (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149691)

I suspect it will be massaged over the years to work out little wrinkles, with the end result being a single payer system.

Re:Thank goodness (3, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149735)

That would be my assumption. So it isn't a done deal in the long term, but in the short and medium term, the Republicans won't get many, if any more chances to kill it. I'd say Obamacare, and whatever it ultimately morphs into, is now pretty much cemented into the landscape. Within a few election cycles, no one will be talking about repealing it.

Re:Thank goodness (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149749)

I dunno... some people are still trying to kill Social Security.

Re: Thank goodness (2)

confused one (671304) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149955)

Some of the same actors in the current crises are among those you refer to

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149799)

I'll at least give you credit for admitting that your ultimate goal is a single payer system. Most democrats wouldn't admit to this. I suspect the Obamacare bill as passed is just a way to get their foot in the door. They know that like virtually all government programs, this will just balloon over time.

Re:Thank goodness (2)

harks (534599) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149899)

Health insurance company stocks are near all time highs. I don't think they're going out of business any time soon.

Re:Thank goodness (2, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149765)

Part of does wonder, though, whether this makes the ACA a "done deal"

No, it doesn't, for a number of reasons. First, it is opposed by more people than favor it (there's a large enough group of people who are undecided to make a huge difference, though). That's why Republicans can get away with trying to shut down the government, especially when they come from districts full of people who favor their opposition. At least, some Republicans will think they can get away with it. Some of them are also insane.

The biggest threat to ACA is the ACA itself. If it works out, and most people have cheaper insurance, and healthcare generally gets better, then people will being to support it (all those undecideds). If it doesn't work out, if there are massive problems, if healthcare costs are perceived to go up, if healthcare generally gets worse, even if it's not entirely ACA's fault, then the opposition to ACA will grow.

That's where the (accidental?) genius of the Republican plan comes from.........if Obamacare turns out looking really bad before the next election, then Democrats are going to have difficulty maintaining their position.

So......do you think the ACA will end up being a good thing or not? That is the answer to the question of whether it is a done deal, and probably the answer to which party will be dominant for the next five years.

Re:Thank goodness (0, Troll)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149821)

it is opposed by more people than favor it

I'm not sure I believe this.

but even if that was true, you would probably have to include 'faux news' viewers in that. ie, the gullible and most easily fooled.

those viewers still believe obama is a secret muslim that was not born in the US. their opinions don't count for much, sorry to say.

Re:Thank goodness (2)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149861)

I'm not sure I believe this. but even if that was true, you would probably have to include 'faux news' viewers in that. ie, the gullible and most easily fooled.

I will tell you right now why they are gullible and easily fooled. It's because they are too lazy to go out and do research, and find out the data for themselves. These are the people who think we could balance the budget if only we got rid of "welfare queens." These are the people who think all we have to do to fix the deficit is cut back on military spending. They think these things because they are too lazy to go to Wikipedia and look at the facts. Then the go on forums and make wild, accusatory posts based on their ignorance.

In other words, people who say, "I'm not sure I believe this" are the gullible and easily fooled. Yes, I am saying you are one of those gullible people. Stop it, get some facts and we can have a real conversation.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149951)

Neither parent post nor grand-parent post indicated enough information to assume whether they did or did not look at facts or do a wikipedia post. Neither showed evidence for or against ignorance. Although only one is 'accusatory'. If you want the person you disagree with to 'get some facts' it helps to do so yourself first... and show you do so with some links and references. Otherwise it is more polite to assume they did look things up as you want us to assume you did until proven otherwise.

Disagreeing or doubting what another person stated as fact is actually the opposite of being gullible and easily fooled, at least according to any dictionary I've ever read.

Re:Thank goodness (3, Insightful)

Technician (215283) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149869)

Early reports of those trying to renew insurance or get into exchanges are finding rates near double or more of the previous rates. Guess that is the cost of adding pre-existing conditions to the covered. I expect this to be the new norm with a whole batch of subsidies that anyone earning a living will be unelegible for.

To keep health coverage.. lose the job and apply for assistance. The only casualty is the economy.

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149995)

Weird. Mine dropped by almost $300, though it's still a shitty plan compared to the $200 or so I was paying (50% of) for a policy with a $250 deductible 10 years ago.

Of course, that was also before I was diagnosed with MS, and the joke the Republicans like to tell about how ACA's preexisting condition benefit was a lie and that all you had to do is get insurance before you get sick and you can keep it forever is that yeah the government forced them to keep covering you, but they didn't force them to keep the same rates.

Re:Thank goodness (2)

danheskett (178529) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150047)

This varies widely by area. I live in Florida, and I have about 140 plans available to choose from on the exchange, and they range in cost from around a hundred dollars month, to around four hundred a month. Compared to the private market before, there are a few more choices (and a few new carriers, and a few new regional plans) and costs are very similar or slightly lower.

What is definitely different is that junk insurance that provides very little actual insurance is gone from existence. Even for catastrophic plans, if you can get one (based on your age) provide basic preventative health care at no out of pocket cost. If you had one of these plans, you are easily looking at double.

As far as subsidies go, 40k for a single person is not nothing, but it is probably to low a threshold. Businesses are not going to be penalized for about a year, so until then, there is some incentive to dump you off insurance into the exchange system.

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149873)

It will work just like the VA system works. Massively inefficient and strange but people will get "care".

Re:Thank goodness (1)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149919)

The Republicans in the House are currently a few points less popular than a socialist revolution in the U.S. according to polls. The Dems shouldn't crow too much though, they're not doing much better.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150015)

Not approving can mean a lot of things. For your pleasure, I will reproduce what I saw in my Facebook feed this morning:

The more I hear John McCain speak, the more I think that he is a Democrat political operative........ There is no faith in the Republican party anymore to actually stick it out. And the longer they cede power to the Democrats the more they make themselves irrelevant.

This guy is upset that republicans aren't more combative. And you hear democrats saying the same thing.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

gl4ss (559668) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149891)

nothing is a done deal until they revamp the entire house/senate system.

Re: Thank goodness (1)

confused one (671304) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149977)

Not a problem. You only need for those same people to create a constitutional amendment, pass it, then submit it to the public for the states to approve.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149911)

The ACA mostly hurts white men while benefitting most other groups.

This being a Democracy the ACA is a done deal unless white men suddenly go from being 30% of the population to 50+% of the population.

In other words, they're screwed forever and ever.

Re:Thank goodness (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149969)

As an Australian, I've been protected by a national health scheme since 1975. I do not have to pay for ambulances because I live in Queensland. If I present at a hospital all I have to do is show my medicare card and I'll either be seen straight away or an appointment will be made. I've had my share of misfortune, and have had several surgeries for life threatening conditions. I've paid for them all when I was younger, and was paying tax.

Now I'm a pensioner. I pay $5.80 (I think) for most prescriptions. I saw my GP for about an hour today. I didn't have to pay a thing.

I'm going to hospital in a few weeks to investigate some growths. I won't have to pay a thing.

If I wanted to, I could pay and get faster, higher priority treatment. I have that choice.

What is the problem that so many Americans have with socialised medicine? A healthy community is a productive community and pays more taxes to get the job done. I just don't understand why you have a debate about it.

Re:Thank goodness (2, Funny)

houstonbofh (602064) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150063)

Simple... Trust and experiance. We do not trust our government to get it right. This comes from a lot of experiance of them getting it wrong.

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150067)

Socialized medicine, is a general concept.

Obamacare is a specific, flawed, pos.

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150035)

So your takeaway from this latest shutdown and debt ceiling battle was that its desirable to have an entity that was claiming to only be a couple dozen hours away from default paying the bills for our healthcare? These are the morons that given hundreds of millions of dollars and nearly 2 years couldn't successfully pull off building a website to even register a couple hundred thousand people.for healthcare.

Wow. (5, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149683)

I didn't think the Democrats were capable of not caving in.

Re:Wow. (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149743)

Why did you think that? They knew the moderate Republicans in the House would eventually force Boehner's hand. Even Boehner knew it, but this little dance had to go all the way because the moderate Republicans are as terrified of the Tea Party as they are of voters.

Obama and Congressional Democrats have seen this growing weakness in the GOP since 2008, and have been waiting for a chance to humiliate Boehner. Now they'll sit back and watch the civil war in the Republican ranks make the Republicans' dominance of the house become an empty accomplishment.

Re:Wow. (2)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149927)

Because they nearly always cave in, often before the first vote.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150017)

It's like you didn't read the parent.

Or you're right and the Dems grew a pair.

Re:Wow. (1, Informative)

Technician (215283) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149959)

The fight to limit spending is a fight for the economy. I'll leave the research to those really interested. Current deficit is about 17.5 trillion. Do you know how much it was in 1980, 1990, 2000? Do you know what it was when Obama took office? Do you know how much of the GDP is just spent on servicing the debt?

Quick personal finance question.

If your interest payments were over 60% of your income before taxes, and you still had taxes, insurance payments, water bills, and other obligations, would you consider yourself a AAA credit risk? Would it make sense to continue to borrow to give charitable donations to your favorite cause?

Would it make sence to trim your spending to borrow less?

The great divide in the parties is No problem, borrow money and don't be late on payments for a fantastic credit score vs we need to curtail our spending as this is not sustainable as it will trigger hyper-inflation with plenty of examples of those who did this before.

Can we afford ACA?
  If the middle class can't afford it, how can the poor?

If you have a choice between housing and insurance, which will you drop? Between food and insurance? Heat in the winter and Insurance.. Oh snap, insurance is now mandentory. Ok do you drop housing, food, heat, transportation?

Welcom to the welfare state. You voted for it.

Re:Wow. (5, Insightful)

paiute (550198) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149987)

Welcom to the welfare state. You voted for it.

The rest of the civilized world makes this shit work. You don't think America can do it better? Why do you hate America?

Re:Wow. (1)

Neo-Rio-101 (700494) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150025)

[quote] but this little dance had to go all the way because the moderate Republicans are as terrified of the Tea Party as they are of voters.[/quote]

I think this little dance had to go all the way through to sucker enough opportunists into placing orders on Wall Street. Then Wall street looks at their books and moves the market into the direction that they are most likely to profit on aggregate from the orders. ... and if you happened to trade with the banks, good for you.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150039)

Um, the country is STILL far too much in debt and both parties are to blame. Any average Joe can see it's a failure for the people of the United States, not a win for Dems or Reps, or Obama. Even as Obama is quoted in 2006, which suggests of the wisdom he perhaps once had:

'The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here." Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.'

Re:Wow. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149753)

They only cave when lobbyists or polls tell them to.

Re:Wow. (1)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149779)

Seriously? You thought Obama would allow a bill to pass that would get rid of Obamacare?

He wouldn't, especially when the country was blaming the shutdown on the opposition.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149923)

It is more that the extremist Republicans are incapable of admitting defeat. Cantor's speech today was all about how they won. They don't care how badly it has affected the country; the extremists in the GOP got their pound of flesh in the form of concessions they were able to obtain from the moderates in the GOP. I think this is probably part in form of money/campaign donations.

Remember this in the 2014 elections (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149697)

They all need to go. Vote out the incumbents in 2014.

Re:Remember this in the 2014 elections (4, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149703)

They all need to go.

Fortunately the Capital bathrooms are open again.

Re:Remember this in the 2014 elections (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149737)

They all need to go. Vote out the incumbents in 2014.

No thanks, I'll vote based on the individual's actual performance, not because some kind of sweeping generalization steeped in rhetoric.
Along similar lines, interesting that it NOW goes to the President, because to hear some people tell it, this was somehow his fault all along. As if he were somehow in charge of the budget or something. But then again most of those people are the same morons who slept through American Government class.

Re:Remember this in the 2014 elections (2)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149855)

No thanks, I'll vote based on the individual's actual performance, not because some kind of sweeping generalization steeped in rhetoric.

There wasn't a single person in Congress, Democrat or Republican, who actually attempted to avert the shutdown.

Re: Remember this in the 2014 elections (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149885)

Yeah. I like Ron Wyden. I mostly like Jeff Merkley, except that time he verbally voted to include a rider on a spending bill that any country giving asylum to snowden would face issues from the state department.

In general, Oregon has decent congress critters.

Re:Remember this in the 2014 elections (1)

AHuxley (892839) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149981)

Consider any person who is not a Democrat or Republican :)

Vote out ALL the incumbents! (2, Insightful)

linebackn (131821) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149991)

But just watch as election time rolls around. Everyone will have forgotten about this mess, likely focusing on some new manufactured crisis. And even then it will still be a choice between Kang and Kodos.

You know, if you or I threatened to shut down the government we would instantly be thrown in Guantanamo or gunned down by capitol police. But somehow these terrorists that occupy the White House can get away with this nonsense and even expect us to praise them for coming to an "agreement" at the last minute?

Americans doing the right thing (4, Funny)

mhotchin (791085) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149709)

Proving once again that, once all other options are eliminated, the Americans will do the right thing

Re:Americans doing the right thing (4, Insightful)

axlash (960838) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149745)

This is not really "the right thing", any more than a hacky bug fix is the right thing. The right thing is to deal with the deficit/debt, as many Republicans want to - but the way they want to go about it is terrible (a combination of threats and spending cuts only). The reality is that until both parties sit down and agree to deal with the deficit/debt with a mix of tax hikes *and* spending cuts, it's going to be hard to make any significant progress on this.

Re:Americans doing the right thing (4, Insightful)

countach74 (2484150) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149771)

Tax hikes don't necessarily mean increased revenue (they have actually decreased revenue at times). Frankly, the only sure-fire way to pay off this debt is via massive spending cuts. But these are cuts that Republicans aren't generally in favor of.

Re:Americans doing the right thing (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149905)

Depends. A good deal of additional revenue could be appropriated simply by revisiting the corporate tax code. Preventing eg, Apple, from doing a "double Irish with a Dutch sandwich", and hiding $11bn from the us's 30-ish% tax alone is 3bn. (Extend that to microsoft, oracle, and pals as well, and you get the picture.) Playing footsie with investors only works when the market isn't at death's door. In the long run, making those companies pay their goddamn taxes is way better than having debt limit crisis 2014, return of the deficit bomb, both for them, and the world at large, and for the same said investors.

There's plenty of revenue that isn't being properly appropriated. The major problem is the byzantine tax system the US uses, which has more holes in it than a whiffle ball.

We don't really need new taxes, we need to revisit and refine the taxes we already have, and sanitize the tax code. Of course, that would almost certainly never see the light of day, since like term limits, it stands to cost all of the corrupt people on the hill a good deal of money. (Eg, it demonstrates a genuine conflict of interest for them.)

Re:Americans doing the right thing (4, Informative)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149971)

Carter and Clinton managed it just fine. They got the deficit to nothing and Clinton actually managed to pay the debt down a bit.

Or we could raise the taxes in the upper brackets to the levels maintained by that notorious lefty Eisenhower. :-)

Re:Americans doing the right thing (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150007)

Carter and Clinton managed it just fine. They got the deficit to nothing and Clinton actually managed to pay the debt down a bit.

Or we could raise the taxes in the upper brackets to the levels maintained by that notorious lefty Eisenhower. :-)

Your facts are wrong. The last time the national debt went down year over year was Eisenhower. It increased every year under every President since then - Clinton included.

Re:Americans doing the right thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149979)

True, but letting the previous tax cuts expire rather than continuing them might be an acceptable approach given that, obviously, it wasn't a complete economic disaster when those tax rates were in effect (prior to 2001-2003 when the tax cuts were implemented). I don't think "spending cuts only" is any more reasonable than "increased taxes only". Do both, especially if all you're doing tax-wise is restoring the previous rates.

Lowering those tax rates was a big experiment on the theory that if you lowered them, especially for the rich via such things as capital gains taxes, the whole economy would benefit greatly. Although you can argue there were quite a number of other events that interfered (wars and the 2008 financial crisis), I think it's still fair to say that experiment didn't exactly work [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Americans doing the right thing (1, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149961)

Given the history of the deficits, if the GOP is serious about fixing it they should just not field a candidate for president for a few cycles. It's the Dems in the White House that lower the deficit every time (including right now, it's headed down, though the shutdown may cause a reversal) only to have the next Republican come along and blow it sky high again.

But if they want to cut all funding for domestic spying out of the NSA's budget, I'll be all for it. They can cut the TSA and DEA entirely while they're at it. Any one of those will be an order of magnitude more than cutting food stamps would save and nobody gets hurt.

Re:Americans doing the right thing (2)

danheskett (178529) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150059)

You are right on EBT/food stamp cuts. It's a comically small expenditure compared to basically anything. Cutting it makes very little economic sense. There should be a huge list of things to cut before EBT would be on the block in any significant way.

Re:Americans doing the right thing (3, Informative)

ClickOnThis (137803) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149993)

Proving once again that, once all other options are eliminated, the Americans will do the right thing

If you're going to quote Sir Winston, then give him credit [goodreads.com] .

Re:Americans doing the right thing (1)

Mavic Girardi (2869373) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150005)

About damn time they do the right thing!

Veto it. Demand Single Payer. (1)

Tatarize (682683) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149729)

Take that! Better hurry.

Politics in America (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149747)

Title for a book describing all of this:
Politics in America
Democracy Inaction

It might sound a bit silly, but their toying with the idea of paying bills or not is just slightly less crazy than early Manhattan Project scientists doing an experiment called "Tickling the Dragons Tail" which really was a nuclear weapon criticality test. One little mistake, and suddenly you and everyone within ten miles of you are all dead, and no one will be able to identify you later. And that only depends on how much other material is within proximity of your experiment. The hole could be 100 miles (or more) across. The path of no return for the economy is the adoption of another currency as the world benchmark instead of the US dollar. Suddenly the ability to print money to pay bills is gone, and the US is in a huge amount of trouble that talk and speeches won't fix.

Ends? (4, Insightful)

kevinatilusa (620125) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149755)

Maybe a more accurate headline is "US Government Shutdown on temporary hiatus"? It's only a few months funding, and there's no guarantee we won't go through the entire thing again come January 15th...

Re:Ends? (1, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149789)

I can't imagine the House Republicans wanting to go through this again. Everyone has taken a beating, but while the Democrats might be battered and bruised, the Republicans have hemorrhaged support. For some time, moderate Republican incumbents have lived in fear of the Tea Party smashing them in the primaries, but now the choice between accommodating wingnuts and winning in 2014 has become very very clear.

I'm sure Cruz and his ilk will want to pick another fight in January, but even he seems to realize the Tea Party has been damaged by this, and his actions and the actions of his compatriots in the House are threatening to bring down a civil war on the GOP.

Re:Ends? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149903)

Congratulations! You have correctly absorbed the media's message on this fiasco:

Government shutdown
Democrats in Senate and Democrat President refuse to negotiate
So...It's all the Tea Party Republicans' fault.

See any logical flaws here?

yet 33% in the House opposed it (4, Insightful)

binarstu (720435) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149767)

The bill passed the House, but 144 votes were cast against it -- more than 1/3 of those voting! One can only guess at the careful thought that went into casting those votes. Do these people actually believe that funding "Obamacare" for a few months is worse than letting the federal government default on its loans? There is no acceptable answer to this question. If the answer is "yes," well -- yikes. If the answer is "no," and this is just shameless pandering to the extreme right faction of the GOP/"Tea Party", then -- yikes.

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149835)

You are aware that Obama voted against [snopes.com] raising the debt ceiling when he was a senator in 2006. Was he just pandering to the extreme left when he did this? Is it possible that both him and the republicans had legitimate concerns about the budget without calling it "pandering"?

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (3, Informative)

sjames (1099) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150019)

Actually, if you'll read to the bottom of your link, Obama freely admits that he was voting for political reasons and he has now come to understand that it was the wrong way to go. Yes, a politician admitted he was wrong once. AMAZING!

At the same time, he has at least reduced the deficit indicating willingness and ability to work in that direction for the good of the country.

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150029)

Gee, Wally, maybe 2006 was different from 2013, and different circumstances called for different votes. Ya think?

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149851)

The bill passed the House, but 144 votes were cast against it -- more than 1/3 of those voting! One can only guess at the careful thought that went into casting those votes. Do these people actually believe that funding "Obamacare" for a few months is worse than letting the federal government default on its loans? There is no acceptable answer to this question. If the answer is "yes," well -- yikes. If the answer is "no," and this is just shameless pandering to the extreme right faction of the GOP/"Tea Party", then -- yikes.

Don't fall for that nonsense. People talk, the party whips do what they do. Everyone is reasonably certain of how everyone is going to vote long before the actual event. It can sometimes be beneficial to vote no on something that will assuredly pass, and you may even want passed, merely because voters and donors that care to keep track in such detail want you to vote no.

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (1)

Leuf (918654) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149957)

Also 18% of the Senate. They know it has to pass, but they also know there's enough votes to pass it without them. So they get to vote no which is what they think will play the best back in their home district. Sometimes they will even vote yes if it's close and then when there's enough to pass they go back and change it to a no once it's safe to do it.

In the same way, Ted Cruz was all about the filibuster when doing so was completely meaningless but tonight when given the opportunity to actually filibuster he instead just whined for a minute and then made a completely meaningless no vote, like the little bitch that he is.

Not a one of them actually cares about the debt or health care (okay, maybe Rand Paul), only their own careers.

Re:yet 33% in the House opposed it (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150065)

One can only guess at the careful thought that went into casting those votes. Do these people actually believe that funding "Obamacare" for a few months is worse than letting the federal government default on its loans?

I do.

Look, we're going to default eventually. It's going to happen. Better to have let the federal government default and kill Obamacare once and for all so we can start rebuilding America now than to let it continue to fester and making things even worse.

I'm extremely disappointed in GOP leadership over this. They've failed they constituents and they've failed America.

Obama should've vetoed it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149781)

Until Republicans concede to adding a provision that passes the stripped parts of the ACA, raises taxes on the wealthy, makes the GOP House members wear dunce caps for the rest of the election cycle, and also give him a pony. Turn-about and all. :P

Tea party is like a dolphin (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149785)

Cames out of the water, makes a mummery, and then goes to the bottom again...

Just leave it down. (0)

JWSmythe (446288) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149791)

    They should just give up and shut it down. It's what the Republicans (or at least 144 of them) want.

    They shouldn't go for this partial shutdown except essential services. Shut it all down.

    People in seek order in chaos. Call it an era, and let it go. We'll rebuild something better in it's place. Rebuilding will let us get rid of waste and inefficiency that has existed for an awful long time.

    Then again, the current politicians wouldn't have a place in a new system. They aren't really willing to give up power, and perks through questionable dealings.

    Historically, every civilization has come and gone. What we see today are just the ones that happen to still exist. In time, they will fall, and new ones will rise. It's just the way things work.

Now it gets worse. (3, Insightful)

ulatekh (775985) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149853)

The federal government is still spending far more than it's taking in, and seems to have little to show for it.

We're not even borrowing the money any more; the Federal Reserve just changes a number in a computer to create more money, then lends it to the U.S. government at near-zero interest.

This is a shell game of the highest magnitude, and all historical precedents point to this ending badly.

Federal spending has to be brought under control. It appears there's no will in our so-called leaders to do so. A shutdown and default, despite the chaos it would lead to, would have stopped the out-of-control spending. I would like to think there's another way to get federal spending under control, but I'm not that gullible.

This was a chance to stop the hemorrhaging. This chance is gone. The problem will only get worse.

And if you think there's something special about the United States that'll keep it from collapsing like so many other empires in history...I hope you're right. But I'm still constructing my compound on raw land in the middle of nowhere.

Re:Now it gets worse. (4, Insightful)

NoKaOi (1415755) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149917)

This was a chance to stop the hemorrhaging.

No, it wasn't. This was a manipulation tactic by a minority group of legislators to change the law even though they knew they couldn't really change the law legally (they tried and failed) and knew their tactic had no chance of success anyway. That they were able to do this points to a systematic problem that will only get worse. That they hemorrhaging resources into the military (see: Roman Empire) is only a symptom of that systematic corruption.

Re:Now it gets worse. (1)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149939)

This was a chance to stop the hemorrhaging. This chance is gone. The problem will only get worse.

It was not a reasonable amount of time to put together a balanced budget. One does not convince others their roof needs fixing by setting their house on fire.

Re: Now it gets worse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149965)

The Gideon Gono method of managing government money shortages. Of course it predates him, but he was one of the best at it. Now all you need is poorly managed and corrupt resource redistribution, a mad dictator with an unreasoning hate of Tony Blair, involvement in some unadvisable wars (... oh... wait... you have that..) and you'll be quite close to Zimbabwe. I should visit. It'll be just like going home.

Re:Now it gets worse. (4, Interesting)

dbc (135354) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149983)

I agree with you on all points but one -- this wasn't really a chance to stop the crazy. The budget is too out of control to come up with a fix in a few days. It is going to take a very difficult debate among the entire electorate to decide which sacred cows are going to be slaughtered. It has gotten to the point where no politician is willing to bring the subject up because everyone is going to feel some very real pain in order to solve all of this.

It is going to get ugly, without a doubt. The sooner it is tackled, the less ugly it will be. I think it is a 70/30 chance to be bloody, as well.

Everyone who remembers the great depression is at least in their eighties, and they were just children then. Ask them what it was like in order to prepare yourself. Those days were ugly, and we may see a repeat. Only this time, instead of 50% of the population being rural/farm and having the ability to at least grow a garden for their own food, today only 1% of the population lives on farms and 99% is at the end of a food supply chain with a 5 day buffer. Just a few days ago EBT went out in a few states for a couple of days and we came close to food riots. The only reason we didn't have actual riots is that WalMart let people simply shoplift any food they wanted.

Re:Now it gets worse. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150037)

It's still possible, it just takes people who don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, or the good be the enemy of "well, it's a step in the right direction". Start with a few small branches here, a few larger ones there, build up momentum. Close the offices that tell people "no", they hate being told no, they'll love you for it. We could start by deregulating whatever that tiny little branch is that certifies beer flavors that made big news during the shutdown.

Not likely to happen though, if there's anything the tea partiers hate more than being taxed, it's people partying in un-government-sponsored ways.

Perhaps (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149871)

They should have asked Obama if he's going to continue to be a huge piece of shit that continues to cause tremendous damage to the US and its people.

What a cock sucker.

Stupid question from a European (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149875)

Why exactly is providing healthcare to all people so bad?

Is it because it bypasses the private actors? Does it increase costs to the employer?

I mean I find it hard to understand how such an issue can become so passionate as to take a whole nation to the edge of death.

Re:Stupid question from a European (3, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149963)

Why exactly is providing healthcare to all people so bad?

Different Republicans oppose Obamacare for various reasons, some more entertaining than others:

1) It's the road through socialism to full Soviet communism where Obama wants to take us (really, that's what some think).
2) Giving poor people everything they need creates a culture of dependency, and traps those people who receive welfare into poverty (this is IMO more a problem of aligning incentives properly: you need to make sure the system is set up in a way that people are motivated to get off welfare).
3) Some Republicans think we SHOULD provide healthcare to poor people, but shouldn't force people to take buy insurance (people should have the right to make bad decisions, let them die).
4) Some Republicans think healthcare reform is a good idea, but that the details of Obamacare are what make it a bad system (both Romney and McCain fall into this category, at least on the surface).
5) Some think we should provide subsidies for people who can't pay for healthcare themselves, but that we should use a market based system (which generally involves getting rid of regulations, for better or worse).

I'm not sure how many people think we should not actually help poor people out with healthcare (especially once "welfare queens" are gotten rid of). It would be interesting if someone did a survey on that topic.

Re:Stupid question from a European (2)

Qzukk (229616) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150053)

Why exactly is providing healthcare to all people so bad?

I don't think it's all that bad. What we've got, though, is providing health insurance to all people. The difference isn't readily apparent unless you've actually had to use it.

Oh, Barak. . . (2)

jafac (1449) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149895)

When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"

. . . still naive.

Re:Oh, Barak. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149933)

When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"

. . . still naive.

whoosh

Re:Oh, Barak. . . (1)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149967)

Yeah, hard to believe we won't be going through this turmoil. Especially since he played almost no part in it until the end, when he signed the bill.

postpone the inevitable (1)

johnsnails (1715452) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149897)

postpone the inevitable... Come January it will all have to happen again. Nothing has been fixed, US still has a spending problem.

As the saying goes... (-1, Troll)

Cyrano de Maniac (60961) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149913)

And nothing of value was lost. Or gained.

Re:As the saying goes... (5, Insightful)

CaptQuark (2706165) | 1 year,6 days | (#45149989)

And nothing of value was lost. Or gained.

Nothing was lost? All the work that the government workers could have been doing during the shutdown was lost. All the revenue from the National Parks were lost. Two weeks food inspections, drug inspections, VA claims processing were lost . Worldwide confidence in the US and the US dollar was lost. US credit rating was compromised with the possibility of higher interest rates on new deficit. Scientific tests will have to be thrown out and restarted.

You might not be personally affected, but plenty of money and confidence has been lost during the past three weeks.

~~

Non-Partisan Democracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45149997)

Even more proof that the US needs to do away with the current party system.
The US originally was a non-partisan democracy and that may have always been the intention [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Non-Partisan Democracy (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | 1 year,6 days | (#45150033)

I agree, but you may at least patch it to be the next best level by at least provide a proportional election system to the House and possibly also to the Senate.

That would at least make it less likely to create deadlocks like this and also make extreme voices like the Tea Party less prominent.

Cool. The deck chairs were moved around. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#45150021)

On the titanic. Good thing we can have a good old partisan shit slinging festival while we ignore the fact that economic fundamentals have been thrown out the window. Surely this will end well. It's a new paradigm! We can borrow and print forever. Merely questioning otherwise is treason.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?