5
Contributors
12
Replies
13
Views
6 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by jwenting
Featured Replies
  • 1

    [QUOTE=Agilemind;1696337]If the US gov't shut down, basically all public sector employees would stop being paid and all gov't services would be shut. This includes some low importance things like passport offices, some moderately important things like EI, pension payments, research/scholarship payments, the military, prisons, some highly important things like border … Read More

0

Of course they will probably work out a solution, but what will happen if the U.S. government shuts down?

Probably a lot of flag waving.:)

0

Of course they will probably work out a solution, but what will happen if the U.S. government shuts down?
What parts of defense and nondefense spending will be cut automatically?
What about agencies like the CIA and FBI?
What about military funding for the Army and such?

If the US gov't shut down, basically all public sector employees would stop being paid and all gov't services would be shut. This includes
some low importance things like passport offices,
some moderately important things like EI, pension payments, research/scholarship payments, the military, prisons,
some highly important things like border controls (shut down of international trade and tourism), police, firefighters, medicare/medicaid,

As for funding cuts I doubt they would cut CIA/FBI but EI/pensions, education, medicare/aid, prisons and military spending would probably be cut to various degrees. Education and military spending cuts would probably guarantee a huge loss of public sector jobs (add a couple of percentage points to the unemployment), reducing the pensioners to poverty and without health-care, and releasing many prisoners back into society (and many laws would cease to be enforced).

Although IMO it wouldn't come to that, I think its much more likely they would instead turn on the presses and risk hyper-inflation.

0

The Republicans are already planning on passing a legislation canceling the 'triggers' are supposed to kick across the board cuts. In fact the Republican half of the super-committee is saying that POTUS needs to get involved - I assume this is so that after nothing comes from the debt committee, they will be able to blame the President.

The whole idea of refusing to vote for the budget then voting for the across the board budget cuts if 'triggers' are not met is ridiculous.

0

If the US gov't shut down, basically all public sector employees would stop being paid and all gov't services would be shut. This includes
some low importance things like passport offices,
some moderately important things like EI, pension payments, research/scholarship payments, the military, prisons,
some highly important things like border controls (shut down of international trade and tourism), police, firefighters, medicare/medicaid,

As for funding cuts I doubt they would cut CIA/FBI but EI/pensions, education, medicare/aid, prisons and military spending would probably be cut to various degrees. Education and military spending cuts would probably guarantee a huge loss of public sector jobs (add a couple of percentage points to the unemployment), reducing the pensioners to poverty and without health-care, and releasing many prisoners back into society (and many laws would cease to be enforced).

Although IMO it wouldn't come to that, I think its much more likely they would instead turn on the presses and risk hyper-inflation.

That's not a smooth takedown though, I would think the process is defined somewhere?
It probably should be...

1

I agree it should be; but it probably isn't. For instance the EU doesn't have a process whereby a nation would leave, most countries don't have set rules/processes for the separation/independence of a constituent state/province, before Chernobyl there weren't plans for how to deal with a melt-down etc...

Such large disasters are usually un-imaginable before they actually happen (or get close) so no-one bothers to create such plans. This is particularly true for political matters since those that create an institution (eg. US gov't) are usually idealistic (otherwise they wouldn't believe it could be done) and are particularly bad at forseeing worst-case scenarios.

1

If the US gov't shut down, basically all public sector employees would stop being paid and all gov't services would be shut. This includes
some low importance things like passport offices,
some moderately important things like EI, pension payments, research/scholarship payments, the military, prisons,
some highly important things like border controls (shut down of international trade and tourism), police, firefighters, medicare/medicaid,

most pension plans are outsourced to the private sector and would continue to be paid out.
most r&d and scholarship funding comes from the private sector as well
without border control, international trade etc doesn't stop, in fact it will flourish as there'll be no more duties, tariffs, etc. increasing the price of imported goods. Of course the flow of criminals from Mexico won't even be slowed down again, providing work for a lot of former police and military personel in the private security industry (and for the weapons industry to supply them).
many hospitals and fire services are already privately funded, this will increase rapidly, with service levels depending on what the customer is willing to pay for them rather than what's pushed through his throat by government decree.

Under the constitution, the federal government has 2 functions:
- international relations (thus, allowing the states to have a single voice in the world at large for things like trade agreements)
- defense
I'd add interstate infrastructure to that as a duty that couldn't have existed at the time the constitution was created (there was no interstate highway network, no air travel, etc.), but that should probably be merely coordination rather than outright control.

The main trouble would be (after a transition period where people have to reorganise their communities, which in some cases won't be pretty) national security/defense, where there'd be a major vacuum that the national guards of the individual states will be hard pressed to fill.

0

Here is the 'dirty' side of the libertarian 'utopia':

Schooling will be entirely privatized the bottom X% for which industry calculates it is not profitable to serve will be incapable of getting even the basic education to read and write. Similarly that same bottom X% of the population will have no access to medical care because increasing the price beyond their means to pay it will be more profitable, Unfortunately this means diseases previously controlled by routine vaccines will beable to resurface (since many require a very high immunity rate for herd-protection to control it) eg. measles, mumps, whooping cough and new ones evolve (eg. bird flu).

This bottom segment of humanity will rightly feel they have no chance of escaping poverty since they will be unable to get a job (being illiterate and all) thus with no EI they will be homeless and living in ghettos likely involved in various forms of crime. Since these same people will not be able to afford firefighters (or indeed running water) when these ghettos catch on fire they will become a huge bonfire likely taking out neighbouring buildings and the air pollution created will affect even the richest members of society. Since EI will have been abolished any worker unfortunate enough to lose his job due to downsizing as high-tech and high-skill jobs begin to flee (highly skilled people generally don't like living near ghettos or in cities you're afraid to walk down, plus the lack of basic research will cause innovation to stall or move to other countries with flourishing academic communities) will likely end up in this lower class. Along with disease, a lack of education and access to medical services will result in teen pregnancies and large families as well as feral dogs/cats roaming the streets (because animal control will be abolished) unvaccinated spreading Lyme and rabies. Child mortality will have to rise or the poor population will grow rapidly.

With an end to the enormous farm subsidies provided by the US gov't food prices will rise (as will the number of people suffering malnourishment). Also when gov't stops subsidizing business improvements (by requiring their implementation across the board, or giving financial incentives to adopt them) US businesses will continue to lose their competitive edge as other countries help their businesses become more efficient.

Of course, a shut down of the federal gov't wouldn't necessarily mean the libertarian dream at the level of states. It would more or less dissolve the Union and turn the USA into 50 independent countries each of which would have to build an army, re-negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world, etc... Some like Californian would probably see their borrowing costs go through the roof and would either default or print money to pay-off their debts -> as a result the other states would have to adopt their own currency or face a similar problem as the Euro. During the mess while they hammered out the deals (with 50 bargaining partners it won't be quick) business/industry will be left in turmoil unwilling to invest in new operations or grow, some may move out to other more stable nations.

0

That's not a smooth takedown though, I would think the process is defined somewhere?
It probably should be...

Since 1980, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has required government agencies to submit plans for an “orderly shutdown.” The plans require agency heads to “limit their operations to minimum essential activities” and to reallocate funds to avoid interruption of services as long as possible. “Those plans are obviously updated accordingly, but they’ve been around for a long time,”. A lot of what is shutdown is dependent on how they are funded - if the funding comes from annual appropriations, they are shut down; if they their funding has already been appropriated, then they can continue to work. The Congress and the President get their compensation from the Constitution so they will continue to get paid, but I think that Justice is not so they won't get paid.

The first Clinton-era shutdown had 800,000 workers furloughed. Social Security kept about 5,000 workers on but had to recall 50,000 because of all the backlogs, new claims, and delays.

When we were about to get shutdown at the IRS, all the managers and supervisors were going to be furloughed but those of us on the phones were considered essential.

Edited by GrimJack: n/a

0

Here is the 'dirty' side of the libertarian 'utopia':

Schooling will be entirely privatized the bottom X% for which industry calculates it is not profitable to serve will be incapable of getting even the basic education to read and write. Similarly that same bottom X% of the population will have no access to medical care because increasing the price beyond their means to pay it will be more profitable, Unfortunately this means diseases previously controlled by routine vaccines will beable to resurface (since many require a very high immunity rate for herd-protection to control it) eg. measles, mumps, whooping cough and new ones evolve (eg. bird flu).

This bottom segment of humanity will rightly feel they have no chance of escaping poverty since they will be unable to get a job (being illiterate and all) thus with no EI they will be homeless and living in ghettos likely involved in various forms of crime. Since these same people will not be able to afford firefighters (or indeed running water) when these ghettos catch on fire they will become a huge bonfire likely taking out neighbouring buildings and the air pollution created will affect even the richest members of society. Since EI will have been abolished any worker unfortunate enough to lose his job due to downsizing as high-tech and high-skill jobs begin to flee (highly skilled people generally don't like living near ghettos or in cities you're afraid to walk down, plus the lack of basic research will cause innovation to stall or move to other countries with flourishing academic communities) will likely end up in this lower class. Along with disease, a lack of education and access to medical services will result in teen pregnancies and large families as well as feral dogs/cats roaming the streets (because animal control will be abolished) unvaccinated spreading Lyme and rabies. Child mortality will have to rise or the poor population will grow rapidly.

With an end to the enormous farm subsidies provided by the US gov't food prices will rise (as will the number of people suffering malnourishment). Also when gov't stops subsidizing business improvements (by requiring their implementation across the board, or giving financial incentives to adopt them) US businesses will continue to lose their competitive edge as other countries help their businesses become more efficient.

Of course, a shut down of the federal gov't wouldn't necessarily mean the libertarian dream at the level of states. It would more or less dissolve the Union and turn the USA into 50 independent countries each of which would have to build an army, re-negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world, etc... Some like Californian would probably see their borrowing costs go through the roof and would either default or print money to pay-off their debts -> as a result the other states would have to adopt their own currency or face a similar problem as the Euro. During the mess while they hammered out the deals (with 50 bargaining partners it won't be quick) business/industry will be left in turmoil unwilling to invest in new operations or grow, some may move out to other more stable nations.

EI

E-EYE ?

0

The first Clinton-era shutdown had 800,000 workers furloughed. Social Security kept about 5,000 workers on but had to recall 50,000 because of all the backlogs, new claims, and delays.

When we were about to get shutdown at the IRS, all the managers and supervisors were going to be furloughed but those of us on the phones were considered essential.

similar happened when the FDA went into shutdown for a while last year or earlier this year.
All non-essential services (meaning most anything except traffic control) were shut down, all contract workers canceled at the earliest opportunity (meaning as soon as their contracts could be terminated), no purchase of anything not directly needed to maintain essential services at minimum levels were authorised.

0

I am sure you meant FAA but Yeah - they could not even collect taxes! So the flyers paid their taxes and the companies just smiled and pocketed the .gov loss.

0

yah, typo :)
Most airlines I think either didn't collect the taxes, or refunded them if prepaid, for the period.

And of course most things listed as "tax" on your ticket isn't, it's an extra charge levied by the airline to pay the flexible part of their running cost (mostly fluctuations in fuel prices).
Even the "security tax" isn't a tax at all in most places, as it's paid to the airport operator who in turn pays the security company (or the government agency performing the role) on a contract basis.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.