Government Shut Down Looming!

[boyst]

you're probably not old enough to remember what lake erie and the niagara river were like in the late 60's and early 70's so here's a summation: they stunk. you might get lucky and fish out a sheepshead or carp (often with deformities) but a trout or salmon wouldn't live a few hours in that water. and who fixed it and why? local gov't or businesses? well, no. the financial incentive was to do just the opposite: loosen environmental laws. nope. it was the bleeding heart liberals and the epa out to save the fish and birds and in the process, possibly some of your wny friends and relatives. plenty more examples available for the other organizations but they probably will go unread, so i'll stop here.

I remember it. I took part in the efforts to clean it up.

 

And it would have been done sooner or later. The EPA does great things. But it is not democrat or republican. The EPA also does very stupid things. I've had to deal with them before.

Edited October 15, 2013 by jboyst62

[Joe Miner]

I remember it. I took part in the efforts to clean it up.

 

And it would have been done sooner or later. The EPA does great things. But it is not democrat or republican. The EPA also does very stupid things. I've had to deal with them before.

 

The EPA is a joke.

 

Just like any other gov't agency, many of their decisions and policies serve political agendas instead of actually addressing the needs of the country.

[boyst]

 

 

The EPA is a joke.

 

Just like any other gov't agency, many of their decisions and policies serve political agendas instead of actually addressing the needs of the country.

Thomasville and High Point spill 100's of millions of raw sewage in to creeks and water sheds with faulty sewage systems. And the EPA does nothing. Trust me. I know

[Jauronimo]

i'll answer your question with one of my own: don't you think it spiteful and selfish to purposely and knowingly refuse insurance for basic care to millions of citizens and to threaten the financial health of the entire world on that one issue? i think the weight of closed memorials (for a few weeks or so we can begin to hope) pales in comparison.

Since when are supporters of Obamacare at all concerned about the financial health of the entire world, let alone the country? At some point you have enough.

 

Hint, the financial health of the nation and world is why they're opposing Obamacare.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Jauronimo

[3rdnlng]

you're probably not old enough to remember what lake erie and the niagara river were like in the late 60's and early 70's so here's a summation: they stunk. you might get lucky and fish out a sheepshead or carp (often with deformities) but a trout or salmon wouldn't live a few hours in that water. and who fixed it and why? local gov't or businesses? well, no. the financial incentive was to do just the opposite: loosen environmental laws. nope. it was the bleeding heart liberals and the epa out to save the fish and birds and in the process, possibly some of your wny friends and relatives. plenty more examples available for the other organizations but they probably will go unread, so i'll stop here.

 

What a crock of schit. There were a lot more people than your special kind of loonies concerned about the quality of the water. Do you think conservatives are for pollution? I would say that for the most part conservatives are big supporters of true environmentalism, and bemoan the fact that you loonies would rather spend the money to fly to symposiums to talk about global warming than to do the down to earth work that cleaned up Lake Erie.

[Chef Jim]

you're probably not old enough to remember what lake erie and the niagara river were like in the late 60's and early 70's so here's a summation: they stunk. you might get lucky and fish out a sheepshead or carp (often with deformities) but a trout or salmon wouldn't live a few hours in that water. and who fixed it and why? local gov't or businesses? well, no. the financial incentive was to do just the opposite: loosen environmental laws. nope. it was the bleeding heart liberals and the epa out to save the fish and birds and in the process, possibly some of your wny friends and relatives. plenty more examples available for the other organizations but they probably will go unread, so i'll stop here.

 

Here's the problem. Many government programs start out well intentioned. But what happens is they become bloated beaurocraric money pits that do more to make politicians and their cronies rich than what they were originally set up to do. This is reason number one (of many) why we feel that a government run healthcare system, which of course the ACA isn't, is a real bad idea. When the government has zero accountability to the bottom line or shareholders as the private sector does it usually does a very bad job.

 

If you don't see this or are unconcerned about this I can't help you.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Chef Jim

[Tiberius]

Imagine that! Who would have guessed? Racism is driving so much of this

 

This weekend, racism came out of the closet. (Which assumes it has ever been in the closet.)

Protesters marched through the streets of Washington on Sunday with a Confederate flag and then a protester lounged against the White House fence with one. Displaying the Confederate flag in front of a home occupied by a black family was meant to send a particular, and particularly repellent, message.

There were other signs of our descent. Remember Samuel Wurzelbacher? Known as “Joe the Plumber,” he was selected by John McCain as his presidential campaign mascot in 2008 with the same care McCain used to select Sarah Palin.

Over the weekend, Wurzelbacher posted an article on his blog titled: “America Needs a White Republican President.”

“Admit it,” the article said. “You want a white Republican president again. Wanting a white Republican president doesn’t make you racist, it just makes you American.”

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/government-shutdown-racism-roger-simon-98272.html#ixzz2hnUhIKtn

 

Here's the problem. Many government programs start out well intentioned. But what happens is they become bloated beaurocraric money pits that do more to make politicians and their cronies rich than what they were originally set up to do. This is reason number one (of many) why we feel that a government run healthcare system, which of course the ACA isn't, is a real bad idea. When the government has zero accountability to the bottom line or shareholders as the private sector does it usually does a very bad job.

 

If you don't see this or are unconcerned about this I can't help you.

Is medicare helping people?

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Chef Jim]

Is medicare helping people?

 

I'm sorry but I think you quoted the wrong person with this because your post has jack **** to do with my post.

[B-Man]

Megan McArdle makes a point worth quoting about the attribution of blame to Republicans, “an argument that makes sense only if you don’t examine it very closely”:

 

 

It starts by assuming (but never stating) that the administration passed a law that didn’t work as written, and then posits a civic duty for the opposition not to oppose laws that they oppose, but instead to help the majority party turn an unworkable law into something more to said party’s liking.

 

This is absurd.

 

Moreover, it’s not even a very good explanation for most of these problems.

 

http://www.bloomberg...l</em></strong>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

STEVEN HAYWARD:

 

“While I thought the shutdown was a dubious and unwise tactic, I think taking a longer view may cast a different light on the scene.”

 

The conventional wisdom right now is that the government shutdown ranks somewhere between a debacle and a catastrophe for Republicans, and their abject surrender is expected before too much longer. I’m not so sure. While I thought the shutdown was a dubious and unwise tactic, I think taking a longer view may cast a different light on the scene.

 

First of all, like the sequester, have the majority of Americans noticed its effects beyond what the media has been screaming about? The bullying tactics of forcibly shutting off public spaces like the World War II memorial on the mall has surely inflicted damage on Obama that, had he behaved with minimal restraint, he might have been spared.

 

Beyond this, have there been riots or even public demonstrations against the shutdown? The political-financial crises in Europe and elsewhere in recent years have seen mass protests and street riots (Spain, Brazil, Greece, Bulgaria, etc). Where is Occupy Wall Street when Obama needs them? To the contrary, much more of the political energy appears to be on the Tea Party side right now. Pretty clearly the shutdown terrifies liberals and journalists—and that’s about it.

 

Of course, it might be pointed out that this is a faux-shutdown: 80 percent of the government is up and running. This is analogous to TSA airport security: it is shutdown theater rather than the real thing. Stop sending Social Security checks and see what happens.

 

A fair point, but this leads to the next big question: which party most needs the government to be up and running? Ask yourself which party is the party of government and you’ll know the answer. With 90 percent of the EPA furloughed, what’s the downside here for Republicans?

 

More seriously, to the extent that shutdown and “government dysfunction” in Washington causes the public to hold Washington in even greater disgust than usual, who does this hurt the most? Democrats need the public to have some degree of confidence in government for their expansive schemes to succeed.

Edited October 15, 2013 by B-Man

[birdog1960]

Here's the problem. Many government programs start out well intentioned. But what happens is they become bloated beaurocraric money pits that do more to make politicians and their cronies rich than what they were originally set up to do. This is reason number one (of many) why we feel that a government run healthcare system, which of course the ACA isn't, is a real bad idea. When the government has zero accountability to the bottom line or shareholders as the private sector does it usually does a very bad job.

 

If you don't see this or are unconcerned about this I can't help you.

and here's my perspective. the wny chemical industry provided a good life for my family for many years. employees were treated and paid fairly and generally they were good corporate citizens, with one huge exception: pollution. and when the epa and new york state stepped in and appropriately regulated them, they picked up and left for even less green pastures like louisiana, which invited them to have at it as far as polluting. without the regulators stepping in, the river and lakes in wny would likely have been a danger to man and beast for much, much longer and possibly ruined beyond repair. so while i appreciate the absolute need for commerce and industry, i equally see the need for government regulation cuz if they don't do it, no one else will. in healthcare, the pendulum has swung way too far towards industry and commerce and way too far way from public good as a goal. the aca is an effort to slowly shift the tectonic plates under this massive system in this direction. sure, there's been abuse and even fraud in gov't programs but as much or more in private industry. instead of giving up on the concepts (organizations), why not just try to improve them?

Edited October 15, 2013 by birdog1960

[B-Man]

Shutdown Experience Shows Cutting Government Would Be Pretty Painless.

 

While Washington, and the press, have been in an uproar over the government shutdown and the debt-limit negotiations, the debt itself has continued to climb. And that inexorable tide is going to cost us, eventually. As economist Herbert Stein once observed, something that can't go on forever, won't. And this can't go on forever. From this there are two lessons.

 

How bad has it gotten? In the past two years, the debt limit has grown twice as much as the economy. Can that go on forever? I doubt it very much.

 

As Niall Ferguson notes, while politicians crow that the deficit has dropped -- from super-enormous to merely really, really gigantic -- every year that we're in deficit adds to the debt. And the long-term trends are bad: "A very striking feature of the latest Congressional Budget Office report is how much worse it is than last year's. A year ago, the CBO's extended baseline series for the federal debt in public hands projected a figure of 52% of GDP by 2038. That figure has very nearly doubled to 100%. A year ago the debt was supposed to glide down to zero by the 2070s. This year's long-run projection for 2076 is above 200%. In this devastating reassessment, a crucial role is played here by the more realistic growth assumptions used this year."

 

{snip}

 

Something that can't go on forever, won't. Therefore, we won't keep borrowing more and more forever, with stagnant economic growth. So that's one lesson. But the other lesson can be found in the government shutdown: How many people really noticed?

 

The answer, of course, is so few that the Obama administration was forced to gin up a show with "Washington Monument" strategy efforts like closing war memorials and national parks, cutting off death benefits for dead troops, and the like in an effort to get people to care. These efforts seem mostly to have succeeded in driving Obama's poll numbers down to 37% in an AP poll last week, as a majority of Americans concluded -- correctly -- that he was putting his personal political interests ahead of the nation's.

 

The big lesson of the shutdown is that -- in a time when so-called "draconian cuts" usually refer to mere decreases in the rate of growth of spending on programs -- America was able to do without all the "non-essential" government workers just fine. (The same AP poll cited above says that 80% have felt no impact from the shutdown; a majority also oppose increasing the debt limit.) Turns out that most of those nonessential workers really are non-essential. And it's a safe bet that some of those who stayed on the job -- like the National Park Service people who chased veterans away from an open-air memorial -- could be done without, too, in a pinch. Under the shutdown, new regulations also slowed to a trickle, suggesting that we can do just fine with those, too.

[Chef Jim]

and here's my perspective. the wny chemical industry provided a good life for my family for many years. employees were treated and paid fairly and generally they were good corporate citizens, with one huge exception: pollution. and when the epa and new york state stepped in and appropriately regulated them, they picked up and left for even less green pastures like louisiana, which invited them to have at it as far as polluting. without the regulators stepping in, the river and lakes in wny would likely have been a danger to man and beast for much, much longer and possibly ruined beyond repair. so while i appreciate the absolute need for commerce and industry, i equally see the need for government regulation cuz if they don't do it, no one else will. in healthcare, the pendulum has swung way too far towards industry and commerce and way too far way from public good as a goal. the aca is an effort to slowly shift the tectonic plates under this massive system in this direction. sure, there's been abuse and even fraud in gov't programs but as much or more in private industry. instead of giving up on the concepts (organizations), why not just try to improve them?

 

Once again with there is zero accountability to the bottom line or shareholders there is no incentive to improve. It seams that everything the government touches turns into a big hairy ass financial mess. That is why we shudder at something that is already a big hairy ass mess (ACA) when we think of what it will become.

[Tiberius]

Oh, here's a surprise

 

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/poll-huge-majority-of-tea-partiers-think-debt-limit-is-no-big-deal

 

 

Tea Party is like Duh!

[TheMadCap]

Can someone (not Gator) summarize the reasons why GOP is getting most of the rap on this shutdown? Other than trying to delay implementation of ACA as a condition of negotiations...

[Tiberius]

Can someone (not Gator) summarize the reasons why GOP is getting most of the rap on this shutdown? Other than trying to delay implementation of ACA as a condition of negotiations...

 

I won't summarize, I'll just tell you. They are idiots and most everyone can see that

[TheMadCap]

I won't summarize, I'll just tell you. They are idiots and most everyone can see that

 

Thanks! Exactly the response I expected from you, which is why I specifically didn't ask you. Riviting content, as always, Gator...

[B-Large]

Can someone (not Gator) summarize the reasons why GOP is getting most of the rap on this shutdown? Other than trying to delay implementation of ACA as a condition of negotiations...

 

My guess is most people (in polls) don't feel shutting down the Government, Restricting Borrowing or try to Defund/delay the ACA with this Tactic is good policy, rather if Republicans really want to affect change, they should achieve this by capturing the sensibilities of hardworking Americans, therefore winning more elections and changing the Government legislatively.

[birdog1960]

Can someone (not Gator) summarize the reasons why GOP is getting most of the rap on this shutdown? Other than trying to delay implementation of ACA as a condition of negotiations...

because people that agree with the far right policies of the minority that is the tea party in congress, actually represent a small minority of the public. there just aren't that many radicals around on either side and these guys are running the plays and deciding the fate of the gov't on these issues up to now. people resent that AND MANY RESENT THE TRADITIONAL REPUBS FOR LETTING THEM GAIN SO MUCH POWER WITHIN THE PARTY (me included). i also think people are beginning to realize that these clowns are almost untouchable due to gerrymandering.

[B-Large]

because people that agree with the far right policies of the minority that is the tea party in congress, actually represent a small minority of the public. there just aren't that many radicals around on either side and these guys are running the plays and deciding the fate of the gov't on these issues up to now. people resent that AND MANY RESENT THE TRADITIONAL REPUBS FOR LETTING THEM GAIN SO MUCH POWER WITHIN THE PARTY (me included). i also think people are beginning to realize that these clowns are almost untouchable due to gerrymandering.

 

Dr. No Coburn used to be pretty conservative... by his own admission on the Tube the other day he seems like a moderate. I am wondering if the old white folks in the GOP are starting to ask this question:

 

"The Tea Party is no afraid of taking ont he ACA by any means and don't seem to be deterred by elder Statesmen in either party, what will stop them from getting their hand on my Medicare and SS?"

 

Their fierce effort to look at all the Government as debatable, and they're stance that there are no Scared Cows is one reason I find them refreshing, but at the same time, I worry about that recklessness in that furry of small Government sentiment.

Edited October 15, 2013 by B-Large