I think everybody will remember this crap next November! Most politicians tax payer funded salaries don't mean anything to them because their real employers are big business and special interests.
I agree with you Charlie....they all should go, every single one of those game-playing fools needs to be fired!!
I understand the ramifications all too well of not being able to work. I have been unemployed for most of this year, though it's not from lack of searching. We are down to only the most basic necessities...no tv, no cell phones, no purchases or anything other than absolute necessities. My husband is a veteran and has a job that pays a whopping $9 an hour. We have run out of food...
We are unable to help other family members who used to, somewhat, depend on us. Let me tell you this, poverty trickles down way more than prosperity does! I have learned a valuable lesson on what it means to be poor, truly poor...you don't drive unless necessary because of gas, you don't really get to live your life because everything costs something. Think about that. We are eligible for food stamps but I'm embarrassed to use them...look at how so many people around here feel free to judge a person, feel free to comment about what kind of food they purchase if they do use food stamps. Feel free to call someone lazy because they happen to be unemployed. Feel free to judge them because of their wardrobe, or maybe because they haven't had their hair cut and styled...because to do so may mean coming up short on the electric bill or the water bill or running out of food or gas for your vehicle.
Well, I could go on and on there but how dare OUR government treat US this way just to play their little games. Unfortunately, it may take the elimination of ALL government pay, entitlements, etc. for enough people to feel enough pain to take some kind of action. Yes, I'm angry!!
I understand that out of the total of about 2.2 million Federal workers, around 800,000 described by the government as “non-essential” have been furloughed.
While sympathizing with Charlie and all those temporarily laid off, the obvious question remains why is the government employing close to a million non-essential personnel? Wouldn’t it be more cost effective to not rehire them?
Passinthru - please do not get caught up in the semantics. "Non essential" means that these jobs can be left undone in the short term. How long can tanks and planes go without maintenance and up keep? How long can maintenance be sustained without supply parts? How long before you or someones else need a social security claim filed, or an income taxes issue resolved?
Based on your statement above, do you think you get something for nothing? Think of all the business you do with the Federal gov't. For every person you see, there are 3-4 more you do not working in the back offices, answering questions from the public, answering questions from their bosses.
I am hoping you question was rhetorical. Let me suggest some better question - why does the government hire so many contractors under terms that allow them to stay on the job while the Civil Servants go home? Why does the Congress exempt itself from it's own laws? Why are congressional staffers still on the job? Why does a Congressional rep need sooo many staffers?
Charlie, You have my sympathy.I am sure that the work that you do is essential ,and I hope the next vacation that you take is planned.We all suffer when government does not work.
Voters need to remember those who brought this down upon all of our heads and vote them out of office.
Any Congressional pay changes can not take effect until after the next election of the House of Representatives. Not paying Congress during the shutdown would violate the 27th Amendment to the Constitution.
Charlie, I admit to the tongue in cheek nature of my above comment, made as a sort of retaliation to your stated belief that if you are not being paid, what you call “entitlements” should not be paid either.
That you would like to deny the 58 million or so Social Security recipients (including myself) their monthly income derived from insurance premiums and taxes paid over a lifetime of working because your employer has decided to temporarily furlough you seems to be an untypical excess of meanness on your part.
If it is any consolation, the probability is that any money that you have lost will be made up to you; at least this is what has happened after the last 17 times the government “shut down”.
Passinthru, I understand that Social Security is a accumulation of of insurance premiums paid over a lifetime of working. I have been paying Social security myself for over 35 years. I hope there is some left when I am old enough to draw it.
The point I was making was that people defend Social Security and other 'entitlement' payments as the only source of income for retired folks, single parents etc, while not considering that many furloughed Civil Servants are also single moms and older folks and that paycheck is their only source of income. In other cases, like mine, that delayed paycheck is the large majority of the family income. After enduring 6 furlough days earlier this summer, making ends meet might not be possible. Additionally, despite the fact that each worker contributes his or her own portion of Social Security, with matching funds from their employer, the payments ALL go into the US General Fund. In that huge pot of green, there is no difference between your SS dollar, John Smith's tax dollar, or Jane Doe's customs payment on her newly acquired Gauguin.
My overall point was that even while Congress tries, and fails, to fund even parts of the government, the opponents to partial funding say no. Why? Because, they claim, it would not be fair to fund this worker, but not that worker.
Well, the truth is, they are already doing that when they send those Social Security and welfare checks.
Charlie, I'm with you. If I was Obama I'd make the shutdown hurt so that the average American would feel the effects - immediately.
Furlough every air traffic controller.
Embargo Medicare and Social Security.
Cease all distributions to state and local highway and police departments.
Frank, thanks for the info re:Congressional pay. Probably shouldn't apply to their staff. Let them go without pay as well as all other "non-essential" employees.
Charlie, well, how about that, my above prediction that any lost pay due to the "shutdown" will be made up to you is now a fact – with the White House announcement today that it would support a House spending bill to provide back-pay for furloughed federal workers. Good news.
The point I tried to make earlier was why would the suffering of millions of others added to your own make you feel better?
I also disagree with your statement that all SS contributions go into the government “General Fund”.
The “Social Security Trust Fund” has never been a part of the General Fund.
What can be confusing is the “Unified Budget” of 1968 that incorporated all functions of the Fed Government, including S.S. income, into one budget.
It did not incorporate the “SS Trust Fund” into the “General Fund”.
In 1990 the SS Trust Fund was taken “off budget” again, but whether “on” or “off” budget it was just a matter of accounting practices.
Bryant, so you agree that Obama is responsible for the “shutdown” but you don’t think he hurt people enough so he should:
“Furlough every air traffic controller” – i.e. ground all air traffic over the USA.
“Embargo Medicare and Social Security” - i.e. take away health treatment, life support and food from the old and the sick.
“Cease all distributions to state and local police departments” – i.e. give criminals, terrorists, etc. a free hand to commit any crime against defenseless Americans.
I am sure Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood agree with you.
Passingthru, You are absolutely correct . I do not understand how suffering piled upon suffering will serve any purpose whatsoever.
Passinthru, I never not once said that stopping someone else pay would, "make me feel better." If I did, please provide date time in the blog or comment.
My point REMAINS that if ALL payments from the government were required to stop, the Congress and the President would be FAAAR less inclined to do this sort of "passin contest."
Bryant, if I were the President, I would be trying to find a way to get our government functioning again. Instead, he is trying to score political points with a population that is FED UP with both parties. He could make HUGE points if he was trying to end this BS. Instead, he turns his head with crossed arms like a petulant child. Harry Reid, does the same thing. And the GOP continues its tantrum.
And we are ALL waiting for Nov 2014...
Passin - I do not agree Obama is "responsible" for the shutdown. Anyone who feels that way is as big a fool as someone who believes all of the fault lies at the feet of the Tea PArty or the Republicans.
And, yes, I am talking about grounding every commercial flight. Republicans big on business, let them figure out their priorities. AS to the ill and infirm, they would still receive treatment just as the uninsured do now.
And as to your comment on my last statement, "“Cease all distributions to state and local police departments” – i.e. give criminals, terrorists, etc. a free hand to commit any crime against defenseless Americans.", what foolishness! You left out the highway department, so I guess absence of Federal funds means bridges instantly collapse, since the absence of Federal funds for the police apparently means terrorists and criminals swarm out of the dark to wreak havoc on America.
My point is most Americans sit and watch this unfold on TV. There is no direct impact upon their lives at present. If there were, this would not happen because our elected representatives would worry more about our country and the people in it than their political positions and their re-election chances.
And, not to pour more suffering on anyone, except the politicians, by bringing the seriousness of this situation and the looming debt ceiling
to the forefront. And, resolving the issue quickly through public outrage against every member of Congress and the administration.
The tea party has been a malign influence in American politics since its inception ,so I think politicians under the sway of the tea party bear most of the responsibility. Factor in the baleful influence of corporations treated as voters under the irresponsible Citizens United decision ,and you have a recipe for political dysfunction. If the battle is really about Obamacare, it would make more sense for Republicans to do absolutely nothing. If Obamacare is the great evil portrayed by Republicans, the policy will fail of its own accord and Republicans could make polital hay by saying I told you so.
Hardeemann, I disagree with Charles most of the time ,but I don't think he can be accused of whining.
Hardeeman - when I wrote this blog, yes, I had a job, but there was no promise I would be paid for furlough time. I was facing an indeterminate number of furlough days, in a row, for which I might not have ever received back pay. I am thankful to have my job and the pay.
I believe when I told you to quit whining, you were whining about taking ..what.. 3 furlough days spread across a year. And not having had a raise in 2-3 years.
Well, I haven't had a raise myself in 3-4 years! I just got hit with SIX (6) furlough days in SIX (6) weeks during the summer and now this crap. I think I'm "winning."
And thank you, Fly. The point of my blog is not (NOT) to whine, but to try to put all this in perspective and inspire people to vote these sorry-as-sewage rascals out of power.
one thing i dont understand is why an actual shut down of services is necessary- its not like fed employees get paid every day-why not let them keep working and earning the money -i dont understand paying them later for days they actually didnt work! is that accomplishing anything? pay them later for days they actually did work-congress claims they are working but we dont see much proof or progress- fed employees that actually work are certainly earning their paychecks on a day to day basis-im confused
The shutdown is a manufactured crisis calculated to wound Obama and give Republicans a perceived advantage in future elections. This gambit will damage the country and the Republican Party. The entire fiasco is unnecessary.
dirtroadlady, I went through the last "shut down" 17 years ago. Since I was deemed essential, I continued to work while others did not. We all got paid. But, it's illegal to have government employees work without pay (unless deemed essential) and so they are furloughed.
People do not realize the tremendous costs associated with furloughing employees. There are numerous letters issued outlining possibilities. Government facilities, even though not officially "open", still have to be maintained with utilities, security, etc. even though the public is not being served. It's a mess - and totally unnecessary.
Yes, fly...you sure hit the nail on the head. Citizens United, the Tea Party, and now this other case (heard yesterday) up before the Supreme Court. McCutcheon v FEC..."Shaun McCutcheon is a conservative businessman from Alabama who likes to give money to political candidates and committees. He dished out thousands of dollars in donations last election cycle. He says he would have given more, if not for the law that says an individual can only donate a certain total amount each cycle to candidates and certain political committees. McCutcheon thinks the law is a violation of the First Amendment. The Republican National Committee, which joined McCutcheon in the case, agrees. From the perspective of the FEC and those who favor tighter campaign finance restrictions, the limits are necessary to fight corruption." "For the 2013-2014 cycle, individuals can give a total of $123,200 to candidates, national party committees and certain political committees, including a $48,600 limit on what individuals can give to candidates. There are also other limits. For example, an individual can only give $2,600 to a specific candidate for federal office, per election per cycle."
So, wonder how the SCOTUS will end up ruling on this one? I think it's downright scary.
I think for any election, each candidate should be given a pre-determined (voted on by the people) time slot on public T.V., other media ,etc to say what they have to say. This way it is fair and square across the board for each candidate regardless of money.
If an elected person doesn't perform as promised, just like any other "employee" which they are of the people then they are fired! End of story.