Government Shutdown soon.

Well, duh. Why would a birth control organization provide mammograms?

^

To be fair, there's advertisements at my workplace for Planned Parenthood that do advertise breast cancer screenings.

So I got to about page 12 of the thread before giving up.

Has the US government shut down? What's the situation over there?

edit: never mind, found the BBC article

edited 9th Apr '11 11:23:01 AM by pagad

what i dont get is how people seem to think the best way to "expose" lies is to try to lead people into "traps" and then act like theyre doing it for the public own good instead of some vendetta against opposing political groups.

^ Because Michael Moore did it first?

Commissioner Gordon's speech on Escalation would be apt here.

Comparing the summary of the latest 7th extension (69kb PDF) to last year's budget, while most of the items are difficult to directly correlate, I glean the following details on cuts so far: (billions of $)

• Defense: $663.7 in 2010, $673.5 now (+1.4%)
• Homeland security: $42.7 in 2010, $41 now (-3.9%)
• Overall: $1368 in 2010, $1230 now (-10%)

Glad to see we're making such progress, cutting bone and keeping fat, all so that we can preserve over a trillion dollars in Bush tax cuts for the wealthy◊.

From the last thread

1. There is no social security crisis, but rather a $2.6 trillion surplus. So says FDR's grandson, former SSA commissioner.
2. Three decades from now, 80% of payouts could continue indifinitely with no changes to funding. To keep benefits at current levels forever, the equivalent of 3% of the federal budget would be needed, which translates to a 2% payroll tax hike.
   • Currently, the payroll tax does not apply to the rich's wage earnings beyond about the first $100,000. If the SSA had access to these wages, it would increase payroll tax revenue by _15%_.
3. Social security is not part of the budget, killing it would do nothing for the budget, payroll taxes have no impact on the budget. Any mention of Social Security in a federal budget debate is off topic by definition.
   • The SSA does not let “congress borrow” from them, what the SSA does do is use their surplus to buy T-bonds, one of the most secure investments in the world.

Quickthaw necro:

Apparently, the agreement struck at the eleventh hour last friday was just over a framework over how to hammer out a for-real budget by tomorrow.

Guess what's not looking so hot right now? Chances that that budget will pass muster. I'm hearing bits in the news that the total cuts in the proposed budget only trim 300-something million, and Tea Party folks in Congress are pretty fed up over it. Still, it might score enough votes to get through, which happens today.

edited 14th Apr '11 12:03:00 PM by pvtnum11

Sick of this shit, my Japan trip is held up waiting on this budget to pass.

House passed it, 260 for. On to the Senate, Reid thinks it'll fly.

Dunno if anyone's said it yet, but apparently we're good to go through October.

After that?

Probably we get fucked.

Also apparently the looming cap on US debt is set to cause yet another economic crash. Which one side refuses to raise unless significant spending cuts are made, which won't be made because nobody can agree on what to cut, which means the crash will happen, which will reduce tax income going into the government, which will necessitate more cuts, etc. etc. oh fuck me.

Yeah, pretty much.

Which means that the '12 election cycle will be oh so much fun to watch.

Sell ringside seats to that, fix our budget a bit.

Question: is the cap a fixed dollar amount or a ratio of the GDP or something?

^ Do you think anybody with a brain would propose a fixed dollar amount budget cap?

Government?

Touche.

I'm pretty sure the federal debt cap is a fixed dollar amount.

Yeah, they fix it at whatever dollar they want. Then refix it again when it comes time.

It's not like forgetting to adjust for inflation is new. I could swear there's something in the constitution about how any thing over [10] dollars requires a federal judge or some such, but am too lazy to look it up.

I thought it was $25.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

That's the 7th Amendment. Note that applies to Federal courts, not state.

Hey, we both got exactly one digit right.

Hence the brackets for "some small value".