A Government Shutdown Would Be a Disaster

[herman]

Senator Bernie Sanders

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-government-shutdown-would-be-a-total-disaster/2018/01/08/0be4fa12-f4cf-11e7-b34a-b85626af34ef_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.1f2aac6869fd

I do not know why President Trump and the Republican Party — which controls the White House, the Senate and the House — are so willing to shut down the government. Maybe they think it will be good for them politically. Maybe they believe the chaos created by a government shutdown would be a welcome distraction from the ongoing Russia investigation being conducted by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Whatever the motives of the Republican leadership, one thing is clear: A government shutdown would be disastrous for the American people.

A shutdown would harm tens of millions of working-class families who would be unable to access vital services. It would disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of federal employees who would not receive the paychecks they expected. It would endanger members of the U.S. military who are putting their lives on the line defending our nation.

Congress has a responsibility to the American people to prevent a shutdown and work in a bipartisan manner to reach a fair budget agreement that addresses the very serious problems facing the working people of our country.

Unfortunately, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) ratcheted up threats of a government shutdown last week by insisting on ending the long-standing, bipartisan agreement over parity for defense and non-defense spending. This principle of parity is enormously important for working families and is something that cannot be terminated. If we do not act, funding for education, child care, health care, nutrition assistance, affordable housing and other important domestic programs will be at a 40-year low as a percentage of our economy.

As the middle class continues to shrink, cuts to non-defense spending would cause even worse economic pain to working families, the elderly, children, the sick and the most vulnerable. Meanwhile, as Trump and the Republicans demand an unbelievable $100 billion increase in military spending over the next two years, the Defense Department has been inoculated from budget cuts over the past several years because of the Overseas Contingency Operations loophole — a special account not subject to spending caps established by Congress in 2011.

Providing parity in these budget negotiations means, among other things, fully funding — without offsets — the Children’s Health Insurance Program for 9 million kids and community health centers for 27 million Americans. It means increased funding for the Social Security Administration and the Veterans Administration so they can provide guaranteed benefits to seniors and veterans who have earned them. It means keeping our obligations to more than 1.5 million workers and retirees who are about to lose a large part of the pensions they were promised. It means addressing the crisis of student debt, expanding child care, improving our crumbling infrastructure in rural America and protecting our national parks. It means providing help in the national struggle against opioid and heroin addiction.

Furthermore, as part of the budget negotiations, we must also provide adequate disaster relief to Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, as well as assistance to the Western states recovering from terrible wildfires.

Finally, Trump added even more fuel to the fire when he decided to use 800,000 “dreamers” as a bargaining chip for an $18 billion wall that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not want. These dreamers are young people who have lived in this country for almost their entire lives. They go to school. They work. They serve in the U.S. military. The United States is their home; they know no other. For Trump and the Republican leadership to allow their legal status to expire, and to subject them to deportation, would be one of the cruelest acts in modern American history. It must not be allowed to happen.

This is not just my viewpoint. It’s what the American people want. A recent Quinnipiac University poll showed that 77 percent of the American people, including a large majority of Republicans, support providing legal protections for the dreamers. The Republican Congress must act. A clean Dream Act must be signed into law as part of any budget agreement.

The American people are increasingly disgusted with a government that protects the interests of the wealthy and the powerful, while ignoring the needs of the vulnerable. The U.S. government must do more than provide huge tax breaks to billionaires, callously deport young people, greatly expand military spending, end net neutrality, deny the reality of climate change and threaten to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and nutrition programs. We must pass a budget agreement that addresses the needs of Americans and not just billionaire campaign contributors.

[PirateLT]

It needs to happen.  And it needs to be a total shutdown.  No SS checks, no payment to the government workers to include the military.   Make it hurt, make it real.  Maybe the American people will finally wake up and see what a fucked up situation we are in from a budget standpoint.

[mitchscove]

Lesson learned:  Never trust lying scum

What Trump Could Learn From the Reagan Immigration Amnesty

It’s been more than 30 years since then-Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., paid a visit to the White House to lean on President Ronald Reagan about enacting what today is viewed by some as the “Reagan amnesty.”

“It’s high time we regained control of our borders, and this bill will do it,” Ronald Reagan said.

In his book, “Reagan: The Life,” H.W. Brands writes about the president’s interpretation of a 1986 immigration bill at the time.

“Al Simpson came by to see if he had my support,” Reagan recorded in October 1986, shortly after the measure cleared the House. “They have one or two amendments we could do without, but even if the Senate conference can’t get them out, I’ll sign it. It’s high time we regained control of our borders, and this bill will do it.”

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone. Find out more >>

The legislation at the time was widely viewed as an enforcement-first measure, said then-Attorney General Edwin Meese III, who advised Reagan on the matter along with other Cabinet officials.

“It is very definitely a teachable moment,” Meese, the Ronald Reagan distinguished fellow emeritus at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal, when asked how the 1986 legislation might inform President Donald Trump in his negotiations with congressional Democrats on codifying the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), implemented by his predecessor.

The Reagan amnesty of 2.7 million illegal immigrants was paired with the promise of controlling the border and penalizing employers who hire illegal immigrants. The legislation was better known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, named for its sponsors, Simpson and then-Rep. Romano Mazzoli, D-Ky.

The problem with the 1986 law was that the promised enforcement didn’t occur, but the amnesty did, Meese said.

http://dailysignal.com/2017/10/08/what-trump-could-learn-from-the-reagan-immigration-amnesty/

[plainolamerican]

It needs to happen.  And it needs to be a total shutdown.  No SS checks, no payment to the government workers to include the military.   Make it hurt

---

shut it down until politicians come up with a plan to spend less than they receive.

[PirateLT]

Yep.  America needs to wake the fuck up.  Been saying this for over  decade.

[Navy]

So you think hurting all the elderly on ss or the needy on ssi is the right thing to do. You are so full of shit.

[PirateLT]

You cannot get change without some pain.  The issue is that entitlements is really most of the budget.  If you exclude those you will never come to fiscal sanity.  If you were an actual fiscal conservative you would understand this. 

[Navy]

I really don't fucking give a shit if you consider me a fiscal conservative. Hurting people because you resent that they take what they paid in is a shittyy thing to do. Mr. moneybags. ha!

[PirateLT]

This is why you are not a fiscal conservative. You want half measures and not solve the problem.  SS and Medicare are our biggest issues now and the future. We need to do something about it.  If the shutdown threat was as I said, members might actually get their ass together to do something.

You are sounding like a democrat on this issue :-)

[Navy]

Bull shit...go after the cheaters on SSI and leave the people who are in need  to get more of the help...all others in SS paid in. Cutting off their way to pay for their homes, cars , health insurance  , food etc...that's just cruelty that someone like you can be ok with because it won't affect you. 

[herman]

That money isn't "owed" to you or to me, Navy.

On Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 6:36:36 PM UTC-5, Navy wrote:

Bull shit...goo after the cheaters on SSI and leave the people who are in need  to get more of the help...all others in SS paid in. Cutting off their way to pay for their homes, cars , health insurance  , foood etc...that's just cruelty that someone like you can be ok with because it won't affect you. 

[PirateLT]

SS and Medicare is going BROKE not because of cheaters, but because of how many are in the system. We don't have enough taxpayers to support all the people on the program.  Once you figure that out, you will start to be more of a conservative on this issue.

[PirateLT]

She never gets that...  She has no idea how the system works.

[Navy]

It was a promise made. Sure it's owed. Why do you think they send out the checks. The government would certainly rather keep our money then give it back.

[PirateLT]

No it was not.... SCOTUS has said as much.

In 1960, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5 to 4) that entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right.[23

[herman]

You can say that as many times as you want, navy, and you can believe it fervently....but it's not money owed to us.

The SC has said the money paid in is taxes.  Not money being set aside for our future use.  

Moreover, Congress has the authority to alter or eliminate the programs.

[PirateLT]

Ryan's wet dream is to get rid of SS and make it all private.

[herman]

Yeah, I know.

[PirateLT]

He should only do it for 'conservatives'  :-)

[herman]

LOL....GREAT!

[Navy]

You ever missed a check Herman?

On Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 4:52:29 PM UTC-7, herman wrote:

[Navy]

Yes...but it would be for the younger workers...not those close to or at retirement.

[herman]

I haven't said I want to "miss a check", navy.

I've joined Pirate and pointed out the fact it could happen.

[Navy]

II didn't ask you if you 'want ' to miss a check...I asked you if you've ever missed a check? Have you?

[herman]

Not so far.

[Navy]

I'm sure you can use that money...right? As can most all the people who paid in....oh...not Pirate o course...he's a 'fiscal conservative'.

[herman]

What's going on here?

You're still upset that old age benefits can be decreased or eliminated?  Well, I'm not exactly thrilled, but it's a fact, so it's something I have to accept and move on.

I am, however, keeping my fingers crossed that your Republicans in Congress and your boy trump in the WH don't take this opportunity and cut or eliminate the programs.  

[Navy]

They won't cut them for people who are already receiving ...so you and I are safe. 

They will try and change things so that younger workers have to wait longer to collect. There will be some changes if we are to keepp the programs afloat.

[PirateLT]

I am proposing all the 'conservatives' live by the small government mantra and bring and not just sing it.

[Navy]

Sorry mister money bags..., but most of the Americans I call friends ...liberal and conservative...count on that paid in money being paid back. Go after the cheaters...not the people who worked their entire lives.

[plainolamerican]

They won't cut them for people who are already receiving ...so you and I are safe. 

They will try and change things so that younger workers have to wait longer to collect.

---

Full Retirement and Age 62 Benefit By Year Of Birth

Year of Birth 1.	Full (normal) Retirement Age	Months between age 62 and full retirement age 2.	At Age 62 3.
			A $1000 retirement benefit would be reduced to	The retirement benefit is reduced by 4.	A $500 spouse's benefit would be reduced to	The spouse's benefit is reduced by 5.
1937 or earlier	65	36	$800	20.00%	$375	25.00%
1938	65 and 2 months	38	$791	20.83%	$370	25.83%
1939	65 and 4 months	40	$783	21.67%	$366	26.67%
1940	65 and 6 months	42	$775	22.50%	$362	27.50%
1941	65 and 8 months	44	$766	23.33%	$358	28.33%
1942	65 and 10 months	46	$758	24.17%	$354	29.17%
1943-1954	66	48	$750	25.00%	$350	30.00%
1955	66 and 2 months	50	$741	25.83%	$345	30.83%
1956	66 and 4 months	52	$733	26.67%	$341	31.67%
1957	66 and 6 months	54	$725	27.50%	$337	32.50%
1958	66 and 8 months	56	$716	28.33%	$333	33.33%
1959	66 and 10 months	58	$708	29.17%	$329	34.17%
1960 and later

[PirateLT]

Then don't call for a smaller government because you support the portion of the government that is growing the most and the fastest.

[Navy]

I'll call it what ever the fuck I want.

[Ragnar]

[Exposeposers]

Looks just like her.  I can tell by the open mouth trying to let air in.

[Navy]

Sure Jabba...

[PirateLT]

Great, but what you are calling it is not factual.

[Navy]

I call it giving back what was taken...

[PirateLT]

Which is inaccurate on how taxes work. Sorry.

[Navy]

Well you saying it over and over doesn't change my mind on it.

[PirateLT]

And you denying it over and over doesn't change the facts on it.

[Navy]

But I'm not the one who wants to hurt all the people who count on SS , because I'm mr. Moneybags and it's no skin off my nose.

[PirateLT]

I want the budget fixed.  Unless there are real consequences (much like life) nothing will get fixed.

[Lobo]

<<They won't cut them for people who are already receiving ...so you and I are safe. 

They will try and change things so that younger workers have to wait longer to collect. There will be some changes if we are to keepp the programs afloat.>>

The only change we really need is increasing the amount of income subject to FISA, or eliminating the cap altogether.

BTW: You are aware that Social Security and Medicare are both "Socialism"...? And that they both work much more efficiently, cheaply, and fairly than any comparable private-sector programs or policies...?

[Navy]

And you do understand that you and I don't get a choice of not paying in???
If I had my druthers...

[plainolamerican]

The Reagan amnesty of 2.7 million illegal immigrants was paired with the promise of controlling the border and penalizing employers who hire illegal immigrants. 

----

republicans love cheap labor and never vote against their interests.

[PirateLT]

You didn't pay into anything.  Your tax money supports people using SS.............there was not paying into........it was not some account.

[Navy]

Tell it to the chunk of money taken out of many years of paychecks....And now the government has kindly decided to pay us back. With no interest , and taxing it...but I'm taking it and smiling.

[PirateLT]

The seniors that received your tax payer money I am sure would thank you.

You fake conservatives love to delude yourself by pretending you were owed something.  Makes it easier to expand and exploit the government into red ink.

[Navy]

I only want what's mine. The rest of you can go to hell.

[Exposeposers]

Spoken like a true believer in Jesus.

[PirateLT]

It's not yours. None of that tax money you have spent is.......SCOTUS has said as much. 

When you are on SS you will live off the Taxpayers who are working.

[herman]

It's not money "paid in", navy.  And there's no "paying it back".

For you to continue to use this term makes you a liar.

[Navy]

coming from Satan's right hand man...I'm good ...thanks.

[PirateLT]

Or in denial.

[Navy]

I don't care...as long as I get what's been promised and taken from me, I'm good

. I've been taken from my entire adult life by the gimmies.

My turn.

[herman]

Nothing has been "promised" to you, navy.

That's another lie.

[PirateLT]

Nothing was promised to you. I showed you that to be the case.

[Navy]

I'm taking it no matter what. 

I even got a smidge of a raise this month...whoo hoo!

[PirateLT]

You are welcome. :-)

You can take it all you want.  It is there for you. Being on government support is part of what is setup. 

[herman]

Of course, you're taking the taxpayers' monies "no matter what".

[Navy]

It's my taxpayer money too herman...so suck on that.

[PirateLT]

Same thing someone on welfare would argue.

[herman]

It's taxpayers' monies from all over the country, navy, paying for you.

That means you are or soon will be - how have you put it in the past, about other leeches? - "sucking at the government's tits", along with those who take SNAP, housing, Medicaid, unemployment, disability, and other benefits.

[Navy]

I only wish I could suck the tit drier like the lefts base...they've got it down to a science...and you all collect votes for our money.

[I-think4me]

Yes...but it would be for the younger workers...not those close to or at retirement.

---------
So it's ok as long as it is someone else who suffers. I'm 54,Ryans plans would effect those 55 and under. I've paid in my whole life same as you, why should I get cut off because I happened to be born a few months later than someone else?

[herman]

Yes...but it would be for the younger workers...not those close to or at retirement.

---------

So it's ok as long as it is someone else who suffers. I'm 54,Ryans plans would effect those 55 and under. I've paid in my whole life same as you, why should I get cut off because I happened to be born a few months later than someone else?

``````````````````````````

Damn right, I-think4me.  I'm old enough that my younger sisters are over 65, but Maggie has sisters under 55, and they're going to be screwed, too, if the Republicans decide to enact this crappy, stick-it-to-the-99-percenters plan.

(Besides, navy is sort of stupid to assume the Republicans would keep their mitts entirely off her benefits.  The time could well come when her gropers figure they can decrease the amounts of SS and Medicare paid on behalf of the 65-and-older crowd and not suffer too terribly at the polls.)

[Navy]

I don't want anyone to suffer. It's not a done deal . 

[herman]

But you support and vote for the very people who advocate making others suffer, navy.

[I-think4me]

Besides, navy is sort of stupid to assume the Republicans would keep their mitts entirely off her benefits. The time could well come when her gropers figure they can decrease the amounts of SS and Medicare paid on behalf of the 65-and-older crowd and not suffer too terribly at the polls.)

-------------
Ryan plan that I am referring too was from 5-6 years ago. Before we enacted a $1.5t tax cut. So there is no reason at all to believe they couldn't tweak those ages upwards. And if memory serves his Medicare voucher plan was voluntary for those already on medicare, they could choose between the voucher $7k/yr or traditional medicare. For those who were not yet enrolled the voucher would be the only option. (And considering that premiums for a 60yr old can run $15-20k that voucher isn't going far.) of course for those on traditional Medicare we have no idea how the enactment of a voucher program would effect the availability of providers or care.

[I-think4me]

I apologize for all the typos in the last post. I'm on my tablet and my keyboard keeps freezing up and lagging sentences behind.

[Navy]

That's right Herman...I do vote Repub...not a big secret..

[herman]

<<< the voucher $7k/yr or traditional medicare. For those who were not yet enrolled the voucher would be the only option. (And considering that premiums for a 60yr old can run $15-20k that voucher isn't going far.) of course for those on traditional Medicare we have no idea how the enactment of a voucher program would effect the availability of providers or care. >>>

We know all about how expensive it is to purchase individual health insurance plans - on both the pre-ACA market and on the ACA marketplace.  Maggie had no serious preexisting conditions, yet we were still paying $1200 - $1500 per month (with hefty raises annually and declining coverage semiannually).

Thank god for the ACA, which shaved hundreds of dollars per month off the premium price AND gave her better coverage.  

Of course, the ACA will be dead and gone and of no help at all.  And you're right that $7000 per year will be essentially meaningless toward paying for individual policies.  Going to a voucher plan will basically eliminate health care coverage for older Americans.

Ryan and other Republicans know this, but they don't have to care, because they work for the one-percenters, and the groper sheep will vote for anything, no matter how destructive to their own self-interests.

But, hey, navy will have "hers", so, she, too, won't care that you and others are hurt by the actions taken by her Republicans.  So long as she gets "hers".....

[Navy]

I have dealt with your gimmies for decades. 

My turn ..

[herman]

Finally, you admit you are or will be a "gimmie" and a "leech" re Medicare and SS.  Good for you, for accepting reality.

(You also acknowledge you feel entitled to "suck at the taxpayers' tits", as well.)

[Navy]

I'm ready and willing.....gonna take back whats been stolen from me by your gimmies. 

[herman]

Oh, so now it's okay for you to leech from the taxpayers, because....well, because other Americans have been gimmies, so you may as well join them.

[Navy]

Just taking back what was taken. Anyway it's legal for me to do so. 

[herman]

And, now, the old "it's legal" defense for being a gimmie and leeching off the taxpayers.

(Btw, the same can be said for SNAP, CHIP, Medicaid, housing, unemployment, disability, and other benefits.)