Posts
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/us/10sumter.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
I thought this was an interesting article about the impact of the shutdown that has since been delayed. I agree with the comments on the previous post, that it doesn’t solve the issue of the shutdown though but I bet the delay has brought home the impact that the shutdown will have to the politicians.
I hope that they (the politicians) see finally the seriousness of the situation and hopefully they will get down to business and finish a budget that should have been finished a long time ago. Does it really serve the constituents if the budget, although finally settled on, never gets into place?
And my question is how can government run if there is no budget to figure out how much to spend on what items? How was this possible? I think that this shutdown should have been an earlier problem. This shutdown threat should have happened a lot sooner, after all the year is halfway through.
And I agree about the politicians. I think they are also very self-serving with the approval of their own pay but not essential people (like soldiers or teachers) who actually live paycheck to paycheck. Sometimes I think government is the biggest scam of them all. If Wall Street and all of the financiers just wanted to get ahead by taking what they can now what does that say of our politicians? Sometimes I think that maybe the government is being run into the ground by the people who are taking what they can out of the system… I am starting to see now why the absence of government was so appealing back in the day when they deregulated everything which for me was a hard idea to grasp. I am of the mind that if there are no rules than how do you know what is fair and how to play the game?
Now the shutdown hullabaloo has shown me the merit of deregulation as I am starting to see all the corruption in the system but also the downside to deregulation would be the opening up of the system to more corruption and greed as there are no rules. It is like a Jenga tower. It keeps building on itself but as it increases it gets shakier and shakier.
Here is an interesting article I just read:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/will-lawmakers-raise-money-during-a-shutdown/
What are your thoughts? Is this ethical? Is it okay?
The government was supposed to shut down the first week of March, but we have made temporary budgets so that the nation does not feel the negative reproductions of a shutdown as outlined in McKinney's earlier post.
ReplyDeleteIf a shut down happens, essential people, like those in the military would receive a paycheck, so your statements are wrong.
Jennifer, you used some pretty strong words in this post, like scam, corruption, ethical, and greed, just to name a few.
ReplyDeleteI took particular exception to your comments about members of Congress being a "scam" because they approve their own pay. In reality, members of Congress make $174,000 per year. This might seem like a lot to us college students, but for the choice few people who are responsible for making laws that we all must abide by, I would argue that this pay is absolutely justified. And about them "approving" their own raises, the only thing they vote on is whether or not to accept a COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment), which is essentially a minimal raise that accounts for inflation. In fact, in 2010, both the House and Senate voted to reject their COLAs. In 2004, Congress approved their COLA of 2.2%, and a 4.1% increase for federal workers and military personnel. In short, I think there is no problem with Congressional pay. Who else is there to approve their pay? They have to do it themselves, and I think they are pretty equitable.
Jared, you clearly spent a lot time researching this article... I like the enthusiasm.
ReplyDeleteAlas, Jennifer does make a relevant point about political power. As we are seeing with this situation, politicians seem overly willing to put the lives and well being of other federal government employees aside when arguing the details of this deal. Clearly their are some major issues that need to be addressed when the lack of a decision by congress can leave 800,000 federal government employees without paychecks and delay payment to millions of other Americans.
The last government shut down in 1995-96 cost tax payers $800 million. To look at this through the eyes of an economist, this is quite inefficient.
Lol Chris.
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly, I have not read or heard a ton about this whole debacle, outside of this blog and an occasional tidbit here and there - largely because I get too disgusted with the political rhetoric to stomach it. From what I have heard, though, it sounds like a large part of the rift comes from part of the budget intended to fund planned parent hood. Can anyone confirm that?
ReplyDeleteMy impression is that Republicans (and the Tea Party folks) are claiming they want to get to a $100 Billion figure, but Democrats are saying that the point of contention lies in the planned parent hood program (which, Republicans dislike because of the large part the program plays in abortion). Yet, I may be mistaken. Anyone?
I think your statements about the government being "the biggest scam of them all" is just plain wrong. You're thinking too hard about individuals that try to cheat the system and assume every person in congress is greedy and only wants to benefit themselves.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read too much about the planned parent hood program but have heard that it's a major issue...can anyone fill me in with some details?
Mannor,
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know Dane sums it up pretty well.
These budget cut proposals are a great time for the party in control of the legislature to try to get rid of programs they don't like. I'm sure this is standard operating procedure but it can make it difficult to objectively compare programs and their benefits.
Hopefully the debate over this issue is less political wrangling and more informed assessment over how we spend our taxpayer dollars
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/planned-parenthood-center-budget-shutdown-threat/story?id=13328750
ReplyDeleteHere's an article that discusses the planned parenthood issue. Basically conservative lawmakers no longer want to provide that much money to planned parenthood, saying that the vast majority of that money goes paying for abortions. However, by denying Planned Parenthood this money, they would also be denying critical health care that thousands of women rely on. Clearly it's not the only issue they need to figure out however it is a central one.
Thanks for that article Becky, it was an interesting read and now I see how big of an issue this is.
ReplyDelete