Official Shutdown Thread

[riser]

I hereby invoke Godwin's Law on COLGeek's responses.

Yes, as common with Democrats: Vote Democrat, vote often, vote even when dead.

The buses had donuts on them to bring them in.. these were chartered Greyhound buses that were picking people up and dropping them off. It was on the news but they simply said it was open to everyone after voting. They didn't hand out paperwork, only said how to vote and people did that.

I distinctly remember showing up to my voting location and they kept trying to make me vote Absentee on voting day. It was electronic voting but they kept trying to get me to fill out a paper absentee ballot. After arguing with the lady, an independent person came over and let me vote on the machine. It still turned out to vote for Obama, but the absentee ballot is only used when the margin is 1% or 3% something.. tie breakers.

 

[COLGeek]

Guys, in America, where there are cameras and other recording devices everywhere and where people couldn't keep a secret if their lives depended on it (especially if it resulted in 5 minutes of fame or a few $$$), do you really think massive voter fraud could be successfully perpetrated? Buying votes on a grand scale, I just can't see it. Perception (and how skewed by the press and others) and reality often have no (as in zero) relation between the two.

If you really, really believe that, then I would ask you to strongly consider the validity of your sources.

I am not criticizing any opinions, but possibly of the "facts" being presented. That is all.

 

[wanamingo]

All I hear is more rhetoric...let me guess you read about dems buying votes with doughnuts on theblaze lol?

Weve argued it in other threads already, so lets not rehash it here. But there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud, certainly not enough to affect the end result (Funny enough most of the voter fraud was committed by republicans....oops). I had no problems voting, filed out the ballot put it in a machine and went back to work.

But I guess black people and people who live in cities arent Americans, or maybe you would prefer if black people were 3/5ths of a vote?

 

[riser]

Uh, no. I was in the voting lines watching it happen. But what do you do? When questioned, they simply say it is open to everyone. It's fair, except they're busing people in. I sat there and watched it with my own two eyes.

Mingo - History lesson, yet again. Popular vote means little. We're a Republic, not a Democracy. Previously, they saw it fit to change to a Republic because of vote buying and disproportionate voting power.

It's no secret that if voting was 100% in the US, Democrats would probably always win. Too many people have become dependent on the government, which was what hurt Romney's chances when he called out the 47% of Americans who get some form of government assistance.

Younger people tend to be democrats because they have little and want more. As you acquire more, you want to keep more and more people change parties.

The math is simple: We need more producers than moochers. As long as more producers exist, people will ride on their coattails.

Don't worry, it will catch up to you. Maybe you live in area where it isn't rampant and everyone works hard, low crime rates, and everything is a utopia. But in the places I've lived, I see people living off the system, finding ways to get around it, and stealing my tax paying dollars to do it. Now, I'm supposed to fund the ACA with higher taxes on me?

Eventually, taxes are going to have to go up even higher. The country is running 1 trillion dollar deficits on 2.4 trillion revenue. It will catch up. The rich do not pay income tax. The poor are exempt. Middle class will bear the brunt of the increased taxes. And the you'll pay it and receive nothing for it. Then you will realize what taxation without representation really is.

 

[riser]

The Dumbing down of America right here:
http://nypost.com/2013/10/08/us-adults-are-dumber-than-the-average-human/

When you want more than you have, the government is the solution because they'll just give it to you. Healthcare, higher minimum wage, grant money, housing assistance, food stamps, etc.

I can't comprehend how you would be ok with the current path.

Couple questions:

Do you think overall that the economy and overall state of the country is getting better?
Do you think people are doing better today than their parents?
Do you think the country is on the overall right path?

I'm just curious to know why/how you're content with the overall state of things. It completely baffles me.. I'm guessing it's because you think things have been fine in the past and everything will "just work out" or something like that? No effort on your parts, of course, right?

 

[riser]

I pulled out my paycheck to check my taxes. Every 3 paychecks, I pay 1 full paycheck to the government (It's 100 more than my paycheck).

I'm guessing you're paying less than 1/3 of your check to the government. I don't even pay a state income tax either. That means for every 240 hours I work, I donate 80 hours to the government.

 

[chunkymonster]

Would you compromise with terrorists? I don't blame the senate one bit for denying the house. They are using people's suffering as leverage in their discussions.

OMG_73 was correct AGAIN! YOU are an Obama shill!

How pathetic that you resort tousing the same demagoguery and rhetoric like calling House Republicans "terrorists" and blaming House Republicans for cause of the people's "suffering". What an effing joke you are!

Get a clue!

 

[chunkymonster]

Is that why some districts reported OVER 100% voter turnout? In some districts, yes mostly black districts, Romney didn't receive a single vote; a mathematical impossibility.

It's probably also why Democrats so vehemently opposed voter ID laws and ID checks in largely minority Districts. There would be no way they could bus in all the shill voters if they had to prove they lived in the voting District!

 

[wanamingo]

Name calling chuncks.... Just because Johnson (and I) have a different view doesnt make anyone a shill. Grow up.

I am more than willing to look at your sources as to why we should force the up to 10% of the population to get a license to vote, seems like a big government move to me. But seriously find a source that says a voter ID would have solved anything.

"We can force you to get a federally issued ID, but healthcare? You're on your own."

@riser - You are right in a few things, I know we brought this up in an old thread but the 47% argument is so off base, you are insulting a few groups of people. Veterans benefits and the elderly make up more then 50% of welfare dollars, then you have programs for kids which is another chunk, then the mentally ill, then you have the working poor, then finally you have the real moochers which make up a small portion of that welfare pie.

Do you think kids should get food assistance? Or Grandma should get help if she needs it? Or the mentally ill? Our soldiers? Where do you draw the line?

I dont think the economy is improving, but that is everyone's fault, not just one party. To think that one party is working against the best interests of the people because they plan to... what? End the USA because fascist/communist/socialist?

Spending is a problem, but no one has a solution. You cant really spend your way to financial freedom, and austerity has been a failure in many economies.

I do think that having a healthcare system in place is a step in the right direction. Why cant we have something setup? There is nothing stopping us having a system in place where you wont be bankrupted by illness. Anecdotally I have a cousin with ADHD (Or ADD I forget), he wasnt able to get healthcare because of that, it was considered a preexisting condition.... How do you feel about the lifting of that? Look at countries that have universal healthcare in place, its not like Sweden, Canada, and Australia have burned to the ground. Its possible if only both parties could make it happen.

I work, I pay my taxes and I dont mind helping others.

 

[riser]

@riser - You are right in a few things, I know we brought this up in an old thread but the 47% argument is so off base, you are insulting a few groups of people. Veterans benefits and the elderly make up more then 50% of welfare dollars, then you have programs for kids which is another chunk, then the mentally ill, then you have the working poor, then finally you have the real moochers which make up a small portion of that welfare pie.

I'm not picking anyone group out. I'm simply saying that if you told a vet he would get more if he voted D instead of R, I would argue that over 50% would vote D. On one front they served the country and we owe them. But let's not mistake that as an award. They're dependent upon that money and therefore dependent upon the government. If they were told they could get more by voting D over R, many are cash strapped or not making and would likely vote to benefit themselves.

Do you think kids should get food assistance? Or Grandma should get help if she needs it? Or the mentally ill? Our soldiers? Where do you draw the line?

Yes. I never said take it away. I don't believe the solution is throwing more money at it. I believe they need to take what they have and better use those resources. I whole heartedly disagree with the concept of Emergency Social Security for unwed women who keep having kids. I believe that is a mismanagement of the resources and all social programs should be put under review to properly allocate the money. To me, this would avoid raising taxes because I believe it is clear there is a lot of money going to waste.

I dont think the economy is improving, but that is everyone's fault, not just one party. To think that one party is working against the best interests of the people because they plan to... what? End the USA because fascist/communist/socialist?

My issue is how much debt we're taking on. Under Bush, the Democrats blasted him for his deficits of $300 billion a year. Looking at the last 4 years, 2013 will be the first year we were under $1 trillion deficit on Obama.. but that's only after 20% sequestration and that the last 2 months haven't been accounted for. If you add in the last 2 months, it nearly puts us at $1 trillion. On top of that, the additional cost of healthcare which I think is fairly clear will run in the red.... debt enslaves us.

 

[riser]

Pretty good academic paper:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eric-cantor-divided-government-requires-bipartisan-negotiation/2013/10/08/98f6b7e6-3062-11e3-bbed-a8a60c601153_print.html

The article is short, concise, and has citations in it for the references.

 

[riser]

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/327363-reid-wants-1t-debt-hike-to-end-of-2014

Harry Reid wants $1.1 trillion dollar deficit increase which hopes to hold off any more debt ceiling increased until the end of 2014. $1.1 Trillion dollars will last 14.5 months with current spending.

When the spigot turns off... there will be impacts. The more we over spend, the bigger the problem becomes when it turns off. We all know that giving more makes it harder to take it back or stop giving. $2.4 trillion income, $1.1 trillion additional spending.

2012 numbers:

Tax Revenue: $2,450,000,000,000
Budget: $3,537,000,000,000
New Debt: $1,087,000,000,000
Nat'l Debt: $16,050,000,000,000
Budget Cuts: $120,000,000,000

Reality, removed 8 zeros to make it easier to understand and put it as a personal budget.

Annual Income: $24,500
Annual Budget: $35,370
New Debt: $10,870
Existing Debt: $160,500
Budget Cuts: $1200

Anyone living like that would be forced into bankruptcy. We can't vote to increase our credit limits like the government. At some point, spending must be drastically cut to run a surplus, or it will come crashing down. The 3rd option would be to find a happy middle group and just make minimum payments.. but that's where we technically are at right now, except we have to borrow money to make those payments.

 

[johnsonma]

Would you compromise with terrorists? I don't blame the senate one bit for denying the house. They are using people's suffering as leverage in their discussions.

OMG_73 was correct AGAIN! YOU are an Obama shill!

How pathetic that you resort tousing the same demagoguery and rhetoric like calling House Republicans "terrorists" and blaming House Republicans for cause of the people's "suffering". What an effing joke you are!

Get a clue!

Lol....k

 

[johnsonma]

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/327363-reid-wants-1t-debt-hike-to-end-of-2014

Harry Reid wants $1.1 trillion dollar deficit increase which hopes to hold off any more debt ceiling increased until the end of 2014. $1.1 Trillion dollars will last 14.5 months with current spending.

When the spigot turns off... there will be impacts. The more we over spend, the bigger the problem becomes when it turns off. We all know that giving more makes it harder to take it back or stop giving. $2.4 trillion income, $1.1 trillion additional spending.

2012 numbers:

Tax Revenue: $2,450,000,000,000
Budget: $3,537,000,000,000
New Debt: $1,087,000,000,000
Nat'l Debt: $16,050,000,000,000
Budget Cuts: $120,000,000,000

Reality, removed 8 zeros to make it easier to understand and put it as a personal budget.

Annual Income: $24,500
Annual Budget: $35,370
New Debt: $10,870
Existing Debt: $160,500
Budget Cuts: $1200

Anyone living like that would be forced into bankruptcy. We can't vote to increase our credit limits like the government. At some point, spending must be drastically cut to run a surplus, or it will come crashing down. The 3rd option would be to find a happy middle group and just make minimum payments.. but that's where we technically are at right now, except we have to borrow money to make those payments.

I would think the best option would be to make more money and decrease spending.

 

[wanamingo]

Cut heavily from defense....

 

[riser]

Eliminate defense spending completely let's say. Companies go under because they're producing items for the US gov't to use and to sell to other countries for money. US sold $66 billion last year, $700 billion spent in defense spending. Net difference $635 billion reduced.

Still have $500 billion to go. I won't dig deeper into other revenue generated by the defense budget like lost jobs, companies going out of business, etc.

 

[wanamingo]

You could make the exact same argument for most of the expensive things the government does. Besides isnt it kinda odd we justify having a giant military because it makes jobs and money? Sometimes there isnt a war to fight.

 

[riser]

It doesn't make jobs unless borrowing money to fund those jobs. Different debate I suppose.

So check these proposed government numbers for 2014:

Defense spending: 831 billion
Standing army, 430,000 active (not including reserves)
$160b for veterans
$40b for healthcare (?)
$40b Overseas operations (Iraq, Afghanistan, other operations)
$52b Overseas contingency operations
$140b for salaries/pay for all military/retirement
$430 billion right there. If you look at the break down, they're doing a lot of R&D and small construction/maintenance on buildings.

Army/Navy/Air Force are around $40b a year for operations/maint and Marines are $7b. So $130b.
total so far: $670 billion Another $250b from R&D, projects, construction, funding security forces, military aid, one off items, procurement of items they need.

2014 Welfare:
$343 billion. Whaaat? I thought it was much higher? 2014 numbers though. You have to look under another category to find the additional cost that was shifted out.
$405 billion has been allocated for welfare recipients healthcare.
$748 billion is the grand total after the ACA goes into affect. One number sticks out, they're taking $303b off because it appears they're expecting to make $303b on the ACA healthcare?
The total would be $1.051 trillion minus revenue generated by the ACA ($303b).

Overall healthcare for the entire country, after adding revenue generated by the taxes/fees/medical equipment tax, etc would be:
$974b
They come to that number by expecting to generate the $303b off welfare recipients healthcare and $21b from medical equipment tax.
Total cost before revenue: $1.298t

ok ok ok.. Revenue.

2012, we know the revenue was $2.41 trillion.
2013 numbers still aren't in because the year isn't over and we haven't paid taxes. They're estimating tax revenue to be $2.74 trillion. $330 billion more.
2014, no one really knows, but somehow they're estimating tax revenue to be $3.01 trillion, another $300 billion increase.

They're estimating that in the next 2 years revenue is going to increase $600 billion a year.

Federal Revenue:
2008: $2.52t
2009: $2.10t
2010: $2.16t
2011: $2.30t
2012: $2.45t
2013: (estimate) $2.71

I can understand a $150 billion increase as that seems to be the pattern over the last 4 years. I don't know how a $300 billion jump will happen.
In 1990, revenue was $1.03t
In 2000, revenue was $2.01t (10 years to double under Bush Senior and Clinton)
In 2007, revenue was $2.57t (highest revenue recorded).

According to Obama's economic team and based on hispolicies, when he leaves office US Revenue should increase by $1.1 trillion dollars in the next 3 years.

I think we can all agree those numbers are unrealistic. Even under Bush with the economic bubble, from low to peak, it was only a $400 billion difference over 7 years. To think in 3 years our economy is going to generate $1.1 trillion more a year in revenue.

Defense spending, under Obama, has increased by around $150b since 2008 under Bush. That's interesting.
Welfare spending has increased by around $300b since 2008 but is expected to drop $100b in 2014.

 

[wanamingo]

Riser where are you getting your numbers? There are well over 430,000 people serving in the armed forces (Excluding reserves)

Im also getting conflicting information when looking into budgets....


Edit: Or i guess the real problem is no one has a solution, we would be in a very similar boat if Romney were president.

 

[wanamingo]

“To think that we are going to repeal Obamacare, which would have required 67 Republican votes, of course, was a false premise, and I think did the American people a great disservice by convincing them that somehow we could.”

-John McCain

When youve lost McCains support maybe you should think twice about what youre doing.

 

[riser]

Usgovernmentspending.com and associated sites. I thought I had posted one of the links with a nice breakdown of those numbers but I'm not sure which site had the extra breakdown. It was a couple pages and in an expandable table view.

I think I didn't grab all the numbers. 430,000 I think was for the Navy. I lost my train of thought on that one.. even then, 1.3 million serving or so. Hard to get an exact count from what I'm seeing. I was aiming at the cost vs how many people is was supporting.

Anyhow, I think the math being projected is fuzzy and that is being used a way to offset some numbers.. making numbers up because they don't exist yet.

In other news, no default is likely according to Moody's. Apparently the debt is still services regardless if the debt ceiling is raised. They would need to use current revenue instead of borrowing, so other services would have to stop getting paid in order to service the debt.

 

[johnsonma]

I'm confused, when did McCain do ANYTHING to support GOP efforts, ever? The guy always seems to be siding with Democrats. Anyone else seeing this over many years or is it just my googly eyes?

He seems like the only reasonable one at this point in time. If anything its guy's like him that help me maintain some hope for the GOP.

 

[riser]

Former Democrat Chairmen.... Is this why they want national healthcare??
http://www.turnto10.com/story/23644340/insurance-companies-file-suit-against-caramadre

 

[riser]

Ok, I have it all ready. Here is how we end the shutdown:

We pass the budget the Senate wants, no changes to income generation, spending, etc. The only change is that Congress and the President must also use ACA and give up their gold plated healthcare.

I believe that's a very good deal.

.
.
.
Oh wait, the Republicans proposed that and Obama and the Democrats turned it down - this was the 3rd bill the House passed and sent to the Senate.

 

[COLGeek]

How about this...Pass a clean CR, raise the debt ceiling, then "fix" ACA to provide coverage and improve the LAW (passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the President, and upheld by the SCOTUS).

Sure be nice to actually have an annual budget and not spend the whole year under a CR (as many predict), IMHO. This may be asking too much, though.