Is anybody else hoping for a government shutdown?

I wish they had a line item shut down, so they could leave parts of the government running and shut down the bullshit.

Bullshit. Nearly everything government does hurts the economy.

People do what's economically advantageous all day long. The only reason government ever gets involved in most activities is because it wants to make people do things that aren't economically worth doing on their own.

When those people are criminals, that's a good thing.

But when it comes to what the government spends most of its money forcing most honest people to do against their own economic self-interest? That shit consistently hurts the economy.

Well that's not true.

Are you implying that your dad deserves to be protected from the same risks that millions of others who don't work for the government face every day?

Can you explain why?

Bullshit. The economy was very stable, growing with a debt level at 19-22% of GDP. In under four years it's gone up to 100%. And the Democrats are screaming bloody murder about cuts that would take spending levels down to "only" 2008 levels. Even at that level it would still be the most bloated, wasteful overpaid and inefficient economic entity on the face of the planet. Do you think they can't make do on "merely" $2 trillion??? My God, they're going to shut the government down over .03 trillion!

I was working for the local housing authority during the last gummit shutdown. We weren't affected though because I'll let you in on a dirty little secret. The gummit isn't afraid of John Q. Taxpayer, they are afraid of the moochers.

No, you don't think it's true, which is not the same thing.

But if all the things government meddles in our lives to control were really the best things to do economically, then wouldn't we already be doing them?

Or are you going to argue that government (an institution of whores and scoundrels who can't balance their own checkbook) knows what's best for the rest of us??? And if so, then why is the economy all fucked up with no clear violation of any government policies???

And, by the way, fraud has never been legal. So unless they legalized that, you can't blame "deregulation."

You're a fucking dumbass if you think 100% of government employees are unionized.

My point still stands, you're just a hypocrite.

No, but 100% of government employees do not have to worry about whether government turns a profit, or whether their individual job pays for itself.

And there's nothing hypocritical about the truth.

Apparently not.

Ok first, no government should be required to "turn a profit."

Cancer research ins't going to turn a profit, should that be scrapped?
Yellow Stone doesn't turn a profit? Burn it down.
Asbestos? Company says its safe, what's the worse that could happen. No profit in second guesses!

Correct, and therefore there's a tendency for government employees to operate as if profit and loss do not exist. After all, even when they lose they just force taxpayers to hand over more money.

No, but it could be turned over to private teaching hospitals and pharmaceutical companies who are always interested in profit.

No, but it should be sold or given back to the states. There's no constitutional basis for national parks anyway.

Do we really need Washington for this? Consider Underwriters' Laboratories -- I'm not even sure we really need government to do that, let alone the federal government. Plus, asbestos was effective, economical fireproofing. To say that it was the best to switch from asbestos is not to say the move was the best thing for the economy. Like I said, if it had been, the market would have done so on its own.

What's important is that this is the time when the economy is least able to take extra burdens. This is the time when we least need government meddling, which is why the all-important global warming bullshit has completely stopped being a priority. Likewise, there's an easy million plus people in the employ of the federal government that the economy would really benefit from giving pink slips to right now.

I'm starting to hope the Fed shuts down for good. I'm perfectly fine with the idea of a coalition of states, each individual, each with alliances and agreements with those states to which it is most advantageous to be allied.

Cause government employees don't live in the area in which their government has jurisdiction and don't pay any taxes.

Who had control of the House and Senate the last few years?

BINGO!!!!!!!

It will if those made unemployed are government parasites being funded with taxpayer funny money.

The first business day that George W. Bush took office, the national debt was $5.7 trillion dollars. The day he left it was $10.6 trillion.

Mind you, it isn't very fair to stick Bush with the national debt as it started in 2001, since the first budget he approved wouldn't have taken effect until October 1, 2001, so we'll start there instead, and end on the last day of the fiscal year of the last budget approved by the 109th Congress, so September 30, 2007.

October 1, 2001 - $5.8 trillion
September 30, 2007 - $9.0 trillion.

So of the budgets that the Republican Party were responsible for, they increased the national debt $3.2 trillion dollars, or 55%.

Of the current national debt, the democratic party from FY 2008 to FY 2011 are responsible for $5.2 trillion, and that's assuming you absolve President Bush of any responsibility associated with the budget for FY 2008 and FY 2009.

You're either arguing that they will understand why their jobs should go away, or you're arguing that they should be able to keep their jobs because they pay taxes.

Because I know you can't possibly be arguing that a government employee will insist on working harder for less money because he wants the most value for his own tax dollar.

But it is nice to finally know why we collect taxes from government employees instead of just taking it off the top of their gross -- so that we can pretend they have a vested interest in government efficiency that trumps the obvious self-interest of suckling at the federal teat.

Just government. Government is an institution where people go and complain that they are "owed." And if government recognizes your entitlement, then it takes from everyone else and gives to you. It only takes one convincing sob story to convince Congress to give you a penny from every living American, and there are a lot of lobbyists and bleeding heart activists standing in line to tell sob stories. I, on the other hand, cannot afford to send a lawyer to Washington to defend me from every moocher who proposes to take "just a penny" from me. But when I do the next best thing, I get a bunch of whining libs crying about the shutdown.

Everyone pays taxes. Not everyone is a net tax payer. Anyone on the government tit is a net tax consumer -- their taxes don't count. And "their own free will" is exactly right about anyone who took a job subject to inevitable government austerity measures.

Trying to accurately describe myself as "upper middle class" is now bragging?

We need a balanced budget amendment. But it aint gonna happen.

That would be an act of responsible government. Yeah, don't hold your breath on that one.

Am I the only the only one who suspects that this is all for show anyway?

That no matter how much they bluster and point fingers in public, behind closed doors Boener and Ried are high fiving and saying stuff like, "Man you got me good on 'Good Morning America'! Wanna beer?"

Like Professional Wrestling. They decide which side's the face and which one's the heel based on who's President.

...and these past few budget extentions are just to build up for the cliff hanger, and they'll finally pass the budget at the last minute today, to the roar of the crowds.

WHOOOOOOOOOOO!

Political rhetoric by both parties aside, if they don't get the budget under control, America is going down like the Titanic. The current level is spending is unsustainabale.

Postulating that your point above is valid, eventually the Republican Party would have had to step up and pass a budget.

In any event, it appears from their rhetoric that the Tea Party wishes to force a shutdown. If this occurs, the resulting unnecessary damage to the nation will be the Tea Party's undoing.

I think this has a lot of merit. When the fed finally goes bankrupt, the states can disband it. What happened to national debts when the Soviet Union broke up?

Laughable on more fronts than I can count. I am so looking forward to it. America will be shocked to learn how little meaningful, positive impact this fucking behemoth cancer of a government actually makes on their lives.

All it really amounts to is millions of people living at the expense of everyone else in exchange for a ridiculously false illusion of security. Except for a few basics, the whole damned thing should die in a fire. I'll even strike the match.

The government continuing to spend money like sticking it up a wild hog's ass and hollering "SOOOOOO EEEEEEEEEE!!!!!" will be the entire nation's undoing.

You always fall for the same fallacy, Demi. You only ever see benefits in what the infrastructure does, and you never consider the opportunity costs of what we had to sacrifice to buy it.

You want to have your cake and pretend that we'd have otherwise starved to death.

It's a strawman. I argue that we don't get our money's worth out of government, and then you counter that we get something that has value. We're both right -- except for the part where you pretend that your fact somehow refutes mine.