• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

US Federal Government Shutdown | Shutdown Shutdown, Debt Ceiling Raised

Status
Not open for further replies.
This whole bullshit where they are forcing us to work is horseshit. We aren't getting paid, no clue when our next pay check is coming and if we get sick/injured at work due to inmate or otherwise there's no guarantee we will be compensated for time NOT worked.

Compound that with the fact since we are still coming to work there's this whole idea of "no rush, shit's still getting done" by the rest of the population. It's complete horse shit. The inmates here are still getting paid, still getting cable TV and all their shit. This entire thing is FUBAR.
 
This whole bullshit where they are forcing us to work is horseshit. We aren't getting paid, no clue when our next pay check is coming and if we get sick/injured at work due to inmate or otherwise there's no guarantee we will be compensated for time NOT worked.

Compound that with the fact since we are still coming to work there's this whole idea of "no rush, shit's still getting done" by the rest of the population. It's complete horse shit. The inmates here are still getting paid, still getting cable TV and all their shit. This entire thing is FUBAR.

This is definitely one point the Democrats have been failing to communicate: that the reason things haven't gone to crap is because a lot of people are being forced to work for nothing. It let's Fox get away with the whole "slimdown' nonsense.

ETA. This makes me sound like an ass and I apologize. Your situation must be awful and it was dumb of me to automatically view it politically.
 
So it's the top .5% vs the top .5%.

Nah... just global international banks all for themselves.

Elaugaufein said:
This seems wildly unlikely. The IMF is essentially based in Europe and its attitudes are largely European as a result , putting power in its hands doesn't make sense for the group you're talking about. Especially not if you want the Tea Party to continue being a viable political force, the sell out to socialism it would be perceived as would essentially end them and that's *before* someone pressures them to implement austerity measures on the stats that would result in large sections of the Tea Party's base needing to *eat* bootstraps rather than pull themselves up by them.

Even the fire sale seems dicey. This shopping spree relies on you being able to predict which investments are safe in an event that has never happened before (if a total global collapse happens gold which is the old reliable , may actually become far less so because its ultimately valuable because its an unnecessary luxury item and people pay a lot for it and if things crunch really hard demand gold will crash).
.

The IMF is funded by all member countries, and especially in regards to SDRs (which have to be approved by 85% of members to be "printed"), the US controls a little over 16% of the votes, therefore having veto powers (aka a loud voice in terms of control). Both European and American banking dynasties have been in cahoots since they established our own Fed in 1913, culminating with the IMF/World Bank to set the stage. The dollar and Euro experiments are near their end, so the stage is set for "international cooperation" in taming the markets.

In terms of buying power, the dirty secret is while the paper gold futures market (easily manipulated) has been crashing, governments around the world have been trying to get their hands on as much physical gold as possible. For example, India has been wanting to gut their own ancient temples for gold. Germany wanted their gold back from the Fed, and China is swallowing up anything they can get. The purchasing power is there.
 
But - but - but I was told colleges indoctrinate students into liberalism!

Well you could make an argument they sort of do. Colleges are more liberal than population average though it varies across faculties. But the skew isn't actually as huge as made out. You're talking 5 or 10 points in electoral terms. A lot of conservatives politicians get their start with university council politics too.
 
Nah... just global international banks all for themselves.



The IMF is funded by all member countries, and especially in regards to SDRs (which have to be approved by 85% of members to be "printed"), the US controls a little over 16% of the votes, therefore having veto powers (aka a loud voice in terms of control). Both European and American banking dynasties have been in cahoots since they established our own Fed in 1913, culminating with the IMF/World Bank to set the stage. The dollar and Euro experiments are near their end, so the stage is set for "international cooperation" in taming the markets.

In terms of buying power, the dirty secret is while the paper gold futures market (easily manipulated) has been crashing, governments around the world have been trying to get their hands on as much physical gold as possible. For example, India has been wanting to gut their own ancient temples for gold. Germany wanted their gold back from the Fed, and China is swallowing up anything they can get. The purchasing power is there.

So, developing countries want gold? That's not exactly a new trend by any means.
 
This is definitely one point the Democrats have been failing to communicate: that the reason things haven't gone to crap is because a lot of people are being forced to work for nothing. It let's Fox get away with the whole "slimdown' nonsense.

ETA. This makes me sound like an ass and I apologize. Your situation must be awful and it was dumb of me to automatically view it politically.

Oh, no man, it's all good. Your view is the same as mine.
 
So, developing countries want gold? That's not exactly a new trend by any means.

Not a new trend, but an exponentially increasing trend in this past few years... to the point that one of the biggest vaults (JPM Bank's vault) is on its way to being emptied out by investors demanding possesion pf physical. Gold is still considered a safe haven.
 
So I'll admit I have not been paying attention to politics for quite some time and I thought the ACA sounded great but my friend said that if you choose not to get healthcare that you will be penalized up to $100 a month? I already have healthcare so it doesn't bother me but it does sound like bullshit if I'm understanding correctly.
 
So I'll admit I have not been paying attention to politics for quite some time and I thought the ACA sounded great but my friend said that if you choose not to get healthcare that you will be penalized up to $100 a month? I already have healthcare so it doesn't bother me but it does sound like bullshit if I'm understanding correctly.

Three-legged stool.

Leg 1: We give subsidies to people so that they can buy insurance. But lots of people won't benefit from these unless...
Leg 2: Insurance companies aren't allowed to charge more for pre-existing conditions. But that will force them to raise rates overall unless...
Leg 3: We require people to buy insurance by fining them if they don't. But that will create a hardship on poorer people unless...(go back to leg 1).

Gotta have all three for the system to work.
 
Getting in is not the same thing as graduating at the top of your class. Unless you think all of university credentials are a sham and then w/e

Not saying his views are smart, just that I think he knows what he's saying is bullshit, he's an opportunist.

There is zero evidence to support that obtaining good grades makes you intelligent or capable, even at a prestigious university.

Anecdotal, I know, but: I am a developer. I graduated from a low-key, private liberal arts college with a degree in IT. Before I got my first job (while I was still in college), I got an internship at a local company. This guys platform was a mess. His previous developer took best practice and shit on it. There were errors everywhere, nothing worked like it should, the code was not legible in the slightest, it lacked any kind of organization, and it was about as modular and accessible as a 20 ton rock.

This guy was the top of his class at Carnegie Mellon. The same school who's Software Engineering adviser insulted me for trying to take a class there.

In my experience knowing people at prestigious universities, they teach you so much about the minute details that you lose sight of the big picture. So it is very easy for me to see how some of these people who have great grades at great institutions are so focused on the little things that when they sit up and think "Where is this going again?", they turn out clueless.
 
I believe we will go into default, and I don't think it's for political reasons at all.

Let me explain my theory.

There are only two dozen or so hardcore tea party members, all from gerrymandered districts, who are holding the House hostage. Somehow they have gotten Boehner in their back pocket, and he has completely stopped the government. Now, those tea party representatives are all from wealthy rich districts, very red and lots of money. We all know how skewed the wealth distribution is in this country, it's staggering how much buying power the top 1% have.

So, what do the tea party representatives really have to gain by doing all of this?

I think it's all big business, and I'll tell you why. If the country goes into default, it will not only plummet stocks across the world but send the planet into a recession, most likely a large one. Who does that hurt, and more importantly who stands to gain from such an event? In a devalued market, the wealth accumulated by the top 1% will decrease like everyone else's, but their portion of it will essentially become larger by extension, especially if they are invested wisely and prepared for it (if they know what is coming). They will be able to buy up lower priced stocks, companies, real estate, all at much reduced prices. This is their end game, this is what they are after. They want to default the country in order to amass more wealth during the following global recession. While the 99% will be struggling to make ends meet the 1% will go on a firesale shopping spree.

It's all simply a huge business opportunity, and they are willing to crash the country and the world to do it. And all of this political nonsense is just the smokescreen to camouflage it all and make it more believable, more palatable. They don't really care about the ACA or the debt ceiling, both of those things are inconsequential to the rich like them. My guess is that the 1% have bought off Boehner, because they absolutely need him to hold this line in order to default the USA.

Basically, the 1% have succeeded in hijacking the US government in order to make a very large and profitable business move that will allow them to acquire and amass even more wealth and power.


That's my theory. I think they want to default, it's been their end game all along, and they have no desire at all to prevent it from happening.


I might have gone with your theory, except this is happening: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/norquist-cruz-shutdown-plan/2013/10/03/id/529177

We have Grover Norquist criticising Cruz, and people in the comments calling him a RINO (along with Karl Rove. never in my wildest dreams would I have thought that would happen. No, the Tea Party is truly a monster the billionare conservatives created and thought they could control, but ultimately were mistaken. Its going to take a deal with the Devil (both ways) to stop this thing. The tradtional Republicans in the House need to grow a pair.
 
So I'll admit I have not been paying attention to politics for quite some time and I thought the ACA sounded great but my friend said that if you choose not to get healthcare that you will be penalized up to $100 a month? I already have healthcare so it doesn't bother me but it does sound like bullshit if I'm understanding correctly.

The mandate/penalty is the only thing I have seen anyone complain about. Primarily "I can't afford the cheapest option, so now I'm stuck paying a tax penalty that will be huge by 2016."

I suppose it's an understandable problem. But there is a tax credit they should be applicable for, though I don't know anything about that, or maybe be exempt entirely (IIRC, if you can't get insurance for 8% of your income or less?)
 
I found this interesting about yestersday's press conference.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...ss-conference_n_4065799.html?utm_hp_ref=media

President Obama didn't call on any TV network "reporters". Just newspapers and Internet outlets.
You could see them slowly realize he wasn't going to call their names, it was glorious. And because of that, nearly all the questions were about policy instead of politics. I'm sure Chuck Todd and company were just it itching to ask relevant questions such as "how come you don't call John Boehner every day" or "aren't both sides to blame for this."
 
The mandate/penalty is the only thing I have seen anyone complain about. Primarily "I can't afford the cheapest option, so now I'm stuck paying a tax penalty that will be huge by 2016."

I suppose it's an understandable problem. But there is a tax credit they should be applicable for, though I don't know anything about that, or maybe be exempt entirely (IIRC, if you can't get insurance for 8% of your income or less?)

Check out the Obamacare thread! I listed off all the mandate exemptions in there.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=688313

There is zero evidence to support that obtaining good grades makes you intelligent or capable, even at a prestigious university.

Here's the thing to recognize about Ted Cruz:
a) As a senator from Texas, there's basically zero chance he'll lose his seat as a result of this.
b) The behaviors that have made him extremely unpopular within the elected GOP caucus have also made him extremely popular among the insane GOP base.
c) There's no sign that Cruz actually thought that defunding Obamacare was something that the GOP could accomplish. (This isn't true of many House GOP reps, who clearly believed it WAS possible.)

So I think there's at least a strong argument that Cruz is intelligent and capable and simply has goals that are orthogonal to the GOP leadership's goals -- specifically, that don't necessarily involve the GOP succeeding at anything ever again.

edit: In fact, this is kind of the general problem the Republicans are facing. Individual GOP candidates can now receive a ton of direct contributions through SuperPACs instead of depending on the party to provide funds. Given this, ask yourself: if I'm a Republican legislator in a deeply conservative district, what do I gain from helping the Republican party succeed, and what do I gain when the Republican party is forced into a humiliating compromise that I oppose?
 
I see newzmaxx links in an attempt at serious discussion.
nmKyEgb.png
 
Neither the US dollar, nor the Euro, nor the Yen or Yuan are good as reserve currencies. The dollar now has the tripple wammy of a government drawning in debt backed by nothing but "faith" (and debt serivce that can double with a hike in interest rates), "risk-free" bonds that are now as volatile (or more) than even Spanish bonds, and political disfunction in the government. Couple that with a loss of international credibility, and the stage is set to push the dollar out.

You seem to not like fiat currency. What do you suppose would back a global currency? What commodity? How would we be able to deal with an ever expanding population and growing economey? Especially on a global scale.
 
This probably is completely off topic from this conversation but I felt it would be good to share it here.

So I was playing GTA Online with my little cousin and we just got out if a mission back into free roam. We entered a huge argument between a New Zealand guy and a American guy. What was disgusting was what the American guy was saying to the New Zealand guy and it made me feel disgusted I had to leave.

So I guess the NZ guy was basically shaming America due to the government shutdown saying how America is shameful for not passing a budget for healthcare and how healthcare in his country is free. He basically said our politicians are crap and Americans are pretty much crap for putting up with the bullshit we get. He started talking about the obesity rate and other stuff.

So the American guy completely mad, went off on a rant on how NZ is nothing. No one travels there and no one cares about their lame country. He even said things like how people are buying tickets to live in NZ, their army is garbage, their government is shit and also how powerful America is all at the same time. He said things like America is the most powerful country in the world. Then it got worse and when I got ready to leave. He said America is the country that comes into your land and take over your land. We fuck shit up, come into your country and kill your family. He said right now, I'm sitting here with my glock and if I want I can come to your country, and kill your family just like that. America is this and that.

Now he wasn't trolling or trying to be a dick. He was being dead serious. It was the most pathetic thing I have ever heard. As if being in America is some prized thing. I'm not going to say I'm not proud to be an American but I am not proud of my country and it's nothing to make any type of statements like that. What he said basically made me understand completely why other countries hate us the way they do... It's really sad.

that sense of entitlement
 
Reading about some members of the GOP who think that default wouldn't be bad is infuriating...

Obama needs to go to the Supreme Court and ask them for emergency powers in the face of the utter incompetence and failure of one of the branches of government.

I mean, can he really allow a group of 30-40 radicals slide the global economy back to god knows where? I'm actually really scared that it might happen. I'm terrified. I never thought they could be this insane.
 
Are there rumblings of GAF functioning :(

With the twitter posts here along with the various articles and various dicussions GAF has been my favorite source of info regarding this thing.
 
Reading about some members of the GOP who think that default wouldn't be bad is infuriating...

Obama needs to go to the Supreme Court and ask them for emergency powers in the face of the utter incompetence and failure of one of the branches of government.

I mean, can he really allow a group of 30-40 radicals slide the global economy back to god knows where? I'm actually really scared that it might happen. I'm terrified. I never thought they could be this insane.

wat? am I missing something?
 
Are there rumblings of GAF functioning :(

With the twitter posts here along with the various articles and various dicussions GAF has been my favorite source of info regarding this thing.
GAF is now tied to the governmemt shutdown.
Or it's because NBC mentioned us. One of those.
 
Obama made an excellent point yesterday about "debt ceiling truthers" (lol) that hadn't even occurred to me until he said it: as much as some Republicans want to downplay or flat out deny the importance of raising the debt and avoiding a default, it completely undermines the whole negotiation tactic. Raising the debt ceiling is obviously a big deal, otherwise the GOP wouldn't be using it as a bargaining chip in the first place - and if some want to argue that defaulting on the debt wouldn't be a major issue, then they're really giving no reason for Obama and the Dems to negotiate over it.

"We have what you want, but it's not that big a deal anyway, so...still give us what we want?"

It really is amateur hour over in the House.
 
Are there rumblings of GAF functioning :(

With the twitter posts here along with the various articles and various dicussions GAF has been my favorite source of info regarding this thing.

"As you guys can see, I tried to compromise with the President, but he won't concede anything."
 
You seem to not like fiat currency. What do you suppose would back a global currency? What commodity? How would we be able to deal with an ever expanding population and growing economey? Especially on a global scale.

I'm less of a fan of central banks controlling the money supply (learning now that Keynes' views were usurped to support this agenda), than I am of fiat currency.

It could be done with a basket of commodities, but the truth of the matter is that the current stock of commodities (silver, gold, etc) in existence DOES NOT matter when it comes to assigning a relative value to money. In a free market for exchange rates, any imbalances due to population or production growth in one country over the other, will sort themselves out. What you won't have will be violent boom and bust cycles that only help in creating more debt and income inequality. It's a feature of the fiat system.
 
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...be-tainted-obamacare-prompted-shutdown/70350/

Koch Industries, umbrella corporate behemoth for the conservative Koch brothers, sent a letter to members of the Senate on Wednesday disavowing any rumored positions on shutting down the government over the president's health care law. Even for the controversial and unloved Kochs, it seems, the Republican plan to force a shutdown over Obamacare went too far.

Well. Looks like the Tea Party is getting their orders... I wonder if they've gone rogue with ego tripping over shutting the country down, and letting a first default be on the record for Obama?

Stay tuned.

Pretty huge though imo.
 
It could be done with a basket of commodities, but the truth of the matter is that the current stock of commodities (silver, gold, etc) in existence DOES NOT matter when it comes to assigning a relative value to money. In a free market for exchange rates, any imbalances due to population or production growth in one country over the other, will sort themselves out. What you won't have will be violent boom and bust cycles that only help in creating more debt and income inequality. It's a feature of the fiat system.

Empirical evidence reflects the exact opposite. It was moving away from convertible currency that lessened volatility. Are you not familiar with historical bank runs?
 
I'm less of a fan of central banks controlling the money supply (learning now that Keynes' views were usurped to support this agenda), than I am of fiat currency.

It could be done with a basket of commodities, but the truth of the matter is that the current stock of commodities (silver, gold, etc) in existence DOES NOT matter when it comes to assigning a relative value to money. In a free market for exchange rates, any imbalances due to population or production growth in one country over the other, will sort themselves out. What you won't have will be violent boom and bust cycles that only help in creating more debt and income inequality. It's a feature of the fiat system.

If Central Banks don't issue new money into trade then who would?
 
It's unbelievable to see how much of a disaster the Republican party is in right now.


I want to read a book on this when it's all over.


The question, when does it "end"? What happens to a party that is functioning in an unsustainable way?
 
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...be-tainted-obamacare-prompted-shutdown/70350/



Well. Looks like the Tea Party is getting their orders... I wonder if they've gone rogue with ego tripping over shutting the country down, and letting a first default be on the record for Obama?

Stay tuned.

Pretty huge though imo.

The Tea Party is the Koch Brothers' Frankenstein monster. I hope they're not passed the point of money being able to tether them. The scary thought is that they've gone rogue from their corporate overlords and are now being driven by ego, Jesus, and just pure chaos.
 
Empirical evidence reflects the exact opposite. It was moving away from convertible currency that lessened volatility. Are you not familiar with historical bank runs?

Bank runs have historically happened when depositors find out that there is nothing (or very little) backing their deposits. That the bank does not have enough liquid assets to cover depositor demands. This is the downfall of paper bank notes, and greedy bankers/governments printing as much as they can get away with... until they can't get away with it any more.

Before the current experiment of the Fed, the US went through three separate experiments with a US central bank (all of the utter failures that instigated volatility of prices). In our brave new world, it is not depositors that do bank runs... it is counterparties to financial liabilities (ala Lehman Bros in 2008).

LegendofJoe said:
If Central Banks don't issue new money into trade then who would?

Producers and market participants of any commodities chosen would self-regulate both in determining price and production. For example, if an initial exchange rate is set in $X per Y grams of silver, the price between gold and silver still fluctuate, along with the exchange rate between countries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom