SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Senate Passes Short-Term Deal To Reopen Government, With Trump's Endorsement
President Trump has endorsed a bipartisan deal that would end the 35-day partial government shutdown. The three-week stopgap funding measure would reopen shuttered agencies while negotiations continue.
Trump announces deal to lift shutdown
President Donald Trump has endorsed a deal to reopen the US government for three weeks, after a record-breaking shutdown of federal agencies.
But the pact does not include any money that Mr Trump has demanded for a US-Mexico border wall.
See also: Dem senator unveils 'Stop STUPIDITY Act' to prevent all shutdowns
White House: 'Large down payment' on wall could end government shutdown
35 ways the shutdown is affecting America
Original Submission #1 Original Submission #2 Original Submission #3 Original Submission #4
(Score: 4, Funny) by bob_super on Friday January 25 2019, @10:25PM (12 children)
"Hey boss, sorry for the 5 weeks of bickering. I have a plan to run our multi-billion dollar company for the next three weeks, after which we may have to stop again"
"Bob, you're fired with extreme prejudice"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @10:32PM (7 children)
I like how this was the GOP's OWN PLAN before the shutdown actually happened. A month later and they implement their own idea. Stable geniuses, the lot of them. Very stable, 99 points of contact levels of stable.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Friday January 25 2019, @10:51PM (6 children)
Falling back onto this plan doesn't make them unstable. The dumb part was trying to blame the Democrats for a shutdown the President already took credit for.
Meanwhile, Democrats have figured out that the way to deal with Trump is to get on his level and play the game of hardball.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Touché) by insanumingenium on Friday January 25 2019, @10:55PM (5 children)
We can't all get on Trump's level, or there would be no-one left who could figure out the square block doesn't go in the triangle hole.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday January 25 2019, @11:01PM
Refer to the recent (and probably upcoming) period in history known as the "Government Shutdown".
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:43AM (3 children)
Ok, it's not hard. One's a block, the other is a hole. They fit, you just didn't try hard enough. Take that dinky plastic mallet and throw it away. Bring in the 16 pound sledge and put in a few swings.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:18AM (2 children)
khallow, instructing us all on how the Republicans can take over, by wielding overwhelming force, which they do not have, and the billionaires that funded them, the Mercers, the Kocks, the Adelson, all them be going down. They will run for cover, of course, but there is not place left to go, especially since formerly Great Britian has failed in the Brexit.
And poor khallow! What is to become of him, since there will be no richies for him to suck up to? He may actually have to get a job that contributes something to the common good! khallow! You still got that backhoe to rent? How would you feel about being a contractor using your own capital to dig me ditch that leads out the the current Republican impasse? Fair pay for a fair day's work, khallow! You game? "You load sixteen tons, and what'd you get? Another day older and deeper in debt!"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:10PM
(Score: 3, Funny) by tangomargarine on Tuesday January 29 2019, @09:08PM
Well they *did* up until the results of the election took over. With majorities in both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court (more fun times), and the President, you'd think they'd've been able to get more done.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 4, Insightful) by insanumingenium on Friday January 25 2019, @10:33PM (3 children)
If I could fire all involved with extreme prejudice, I wouldn't even have to consider it for as long as this took to type.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @10:40PM (2 children)
"Would you like to fire all pol*SLAMS BUTTON*enta?"
And that is how the great vegan BBQ of 2019 was started.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by insanumingenium on Friday January 25 2019, @10:44PM (1 child)
Dude, fry up some day old polenta in butter and serve it with eggs, makes a hell of a breakfast.
If only I could figure out how to BBQ it, perhaps in a casing like sausage? Smokey polenta could work.
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday January 25 2019, @10:47PM
Smoked bougie johnny cakes won't work as a name, will need to work on that...
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bradley13 on Friday January 25 2019, @10:39PM (35 children)
Stupid. Not being in the US, I'm not on either side, but: Trump colhosr to make "the walk" his hill. Pulls a record-breaking shutdown. And now wimps out? That's just stupid.
Also, he missed the chance to permanently fire 800,000 bureaucrats.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Friday January 25 2019, @10:40PM (2 children)
Damn mobile keyboard, sorry for the typos...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 5, Funny) by krishnoid on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:11AM
Don't sweat it, it was mostly covfefe enough.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:21AM
Ex-pat Trump supporters, claiming to not be in the US! Pathetic! You are such a looser! I am surprised you can actually mis-type on a mobile keyboard, since you are such a mis-anthrope to begin with!
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @10:43PM (5 children)
Hey even bradley13 is getting with reality! There may be hope after all?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:22AM (4 children)
He's not getting with reality; he specifically said he disapproves of Der Gropenfuhrer *stopping* the shutdown, and because it makes him "look weak." That kind of thoughtless, macho posturing dooms nations, and bradley is showing himself to be part of the problem, the low-information red-meat base whose thought processes are selfish and small and narrow enough that it appeals to him.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday January 26 2019, @04:16PM (3 children)
Der GropenFuhrer [rosi-kessel.org] is Arnold Schwarzenegger, not Donald Trump, you nitwit.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:53PM (1 child)
Would you prefer "The Orange Cockwomble?" "Hair Fuhrer?" "Fat sack of orange Oompa-Loompa shit from hell" as a friend calls him?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @09:26PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29 2019, @09:04PM
After the "grab women by the pussy" comments it can work for either
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @11:22PM
Its just training for the future.
Those people are getting a second chance to save some money for next time the government gets shut down (in a few weeks but also later this year).
Trump has managed to put the collapse in slow motion: eventually they will be furloughed for 2 months every year, then 3, etc until they start getting new jobs. This is actually a genius way to go about it unwinding the mess.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:00AM (15 children)
Forget the political repercussions, the economic impact of 800,000 bureaucrats suddenly out of work would be enough to trigger a deep recession.
First, 80,000 of them would go back to work providing the essential functions that the 800,000 used to do.
Next, the $57 Billion per year missing from the fired bureaucrats paychecks would send shockwaves through the luxury, entertainment and energy industries triggering a drop in demand for products and services, probably another 300,000 lost jobs, and another $20 Billion of lost wages, rinse, later, repeat and the domestic economy would lose over $100B in income.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:03AM
You are arguing that government economic stimulus works. After all, if cutting $57B creates a $100B loss, then adding another $57B should create an extra $100B in income.
I don't disagree, but you are likely to trigger some of the more extreme RWNJs.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:15PM (13 children)
In the meantime 80k do the work of 800k, and the rest can get real jobs. Disaster averted.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:33PM (3 children)
No air traffic control == no planes flying in US. And no IRS == no revenue for government at all.... And no FDA, so you can be served with some rotten shit and fuck you.... maybe you can buy Radithol again? I could go on and on ....
It's sad that you idiots don't know know what these public servants do.
How about fire the Army and then you at least have 3+ million fired that actually don't do anything productive? Would that put your panties in a bunch?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:00PM (1 child)
1) No air traffic control == no planes flying in US
-Whats the history behind this? It seems like a bad idea.
2) no IRS == no revenue for government at al
- They can have the federal reserve or china loan them money, about 25% of the money comes from this anyway. They can also collect tariffs, etc. The US used to have no IRS, no selective service, and no federal reserve. These were all introduced because big US banks (eg, JP Morgan) had loaned craploads of money to the Britain/France/Russia for WWI and they wanted to make sure they would get paid back.
3) No FDA, so you can be served with some rotten shit and fuck you
- You could still sue in state courts, and most states/towns have their own versions of the epa and health departments.
So, I think your post betrays a false understanding of the world around you.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @03:58AM
You do realize that none of those were shut down by the shutdown? There's somewhere around 2.5 million civilian federal employees with 800k furloughed or required to work without pay. Plenty of people left to handle the small number of important federal government roles.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday January 26 2019, @10:36PM
You're hitting the high points, and you're right. If you read carefully, I allocated 10% of the current furloughed workforce to provide those essential services, the other 90% shuffle documents and attend meetings about how to shuffle documents. It's nothing new, but it's not much improved from the time of Franz Khafka.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday January 26 2019, @10:33PM (8 children)
When it comes to turning the wheels of the economic engine, it's not so much about what people do as it is about what people spend.
Dot com wasn't a go-go boom because of all the pets.com websites that were being created, it was a go-go boom because people with cash hoards splashed it out to pay a bunch of people to create pets.com and friends, and those people took their income and spent it on all kinds of things, driving the economic engine.
A bunch of people dutifully showing up to work at a factory and producing high quality goods won't drive economic activity unless people also buy those high quality goods. $200 blue jeans, $4.50 lattes, $80,000 new cars - those drive economic activity, not because they have great intrinsic value, but because they get a lot of cash flowing from the consumers to the whole supply chain that provides these, ahem, premium priced products, and everybody in that supply chain can take their slice of the profits and turn around and feed the machine again.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @04:01AM (7 children)
If they aren't buying, then those things likely aren't high quality goods.
And the problem isn't merely the lack of importance of the activity being shutdown, but also the meager quantity of the economic activity.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 28 2019, @06:36PM (6 children)
Government is people, and people are expensive.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @02:47AM (5 children)
So... get rid of the people and you get rid of the cost. Sounds fine to me. I think we already discussed firing the 720k who weren't doing any work.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 29 2019, @02:40PM (4 children)
The cost is also economic stimulus. Firing the people and eliminating the cost is an anti-stimulus. If you don't believe that matters, then you're calling the Fed and every other economic theorist in power for the last 40 years wrong. That may be your opinion, but lots of data has been collected to back up the validity and effectiveness of economic stimulus, at least for short term effects.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @04:37PM (3 children)
The cost is also an anti-stimulus for everyone who pays taxes in the present and future.
Which, let us note, is far from a big deal. Conflict of interest and wishful thinking are things, Joe.
By all means, let's review that data and see how it fails to explain so many economic recoveries of the past 30 years. For example, Japan is working on lost decade number three despite it's government borrowing more than twice its GDP. The US had a pathetic recovery from its 2007-2008 recession despite massive stimulus spending. Same with the EU.
This is just yet another example of that ancient economic fallacy, the Broken Window fallacy. Here, we're chasing after the shiny unicorn of economic stimulus, by paying 800k people to do the work of 80k people (as you acknowledge), which is the broken window.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 29 2019, @05:59PM (1 child)
Don't forget, you are also wishfully thinking about how you might like things to be, imagining how they _might_ be better if everybody did things your way.
1. Everybody is quite unlikely to do things your way, even if you could present a more charming and convincing argument
2. Even if they did, your theory of what will happen is presently untested on the current economic situation, even if it is based on a long gone historical state of the world economy as documented by biased sources with vested interests
What would I like? For one thing I would like financial institutions that pay a meaningful guaranteed interest rate - say 4 or 5% - on deposited funds - that was a huge component of the economic landscape back when things were done more like you are calling for them to be done again. Am I likely to get that? Hell no, and little point in whining about it, either.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @11:33PM
Back at you on that. Critical thinking is all about mitigating that wishful thinking. Let's do more of that, ok?
In particular, "everybody" means you. This sort of dishonest presentation is a big part of the reason you don't get more politeness from me. Because it's wasted on you.
But it is quite well tested on the economic situation prior to about the 1920s. For example, the US has suffered numerous recessions [wikipedia.org] prior to the present economic approach. Every single one of those recessions ended despite there being no organized Keynesian approach or central bank with control over credit to fix things. So why are we to suppose that stimulus matters when there's little difference in recessions from before and after - including when the US government spent 2-4% of US GDP instead of 20%).
But the reason you wouldn't get that is because it doesn't work, not because some imaginary "everybody" stands in your way. Japan tried that with their postal savings system (which turned into a destructive cycle - they had to invent fake investments to dump the savings into and the result was construction of a vast amount of shoddy infrastructure that few wanted combined with that massive debt I already mentioned in a previous post). Now, it's merely a big part of the reason their economic system is crumbling. There's not enough investment to back that interest rate.
As to your other reply:
Sure, I'm good with gradual approaches - when we are capable of implementing them. But I notice that gradual rarely happens. What happens is that the "broken window" gets protected by the special interests that benefit from the economic harm (which after all is the real reason the broken window fallacy happens in the first place, someone always benefits from the course of action even if it is very harmful to most others) even successfully resisting small reforms. There is no graceful failure mode as a result. We often can't "boil the frog" because the frog figures out how to turn off the oven (after all the reform dude is only going to be in office for a few years).
To name a few examples, agricultural policy in the US is chock fully of incredibly stupid ideas that should have ended half a century or more ago under the gradual ending scheme, but still kick around. There's not going to be a gentle transition to a saner economic basis for that. We have peanut and sugar subsidies that are deeply broken. Currently, there's still a massive incentive to use corn-based ethanol in gasoline even though the process wastes more oil than it saves.
For another such example, raisins used to have a marketing board [reason.com] that would seize a portion of the US raisin market every year. Sometimes up to half the crop and sometimes the farmers wouldn't receive compensation for the seizure. This board was set up in 1937. It was finally ended [reason.com] due to court ruling (massive violation of the Fifth Amendment) in 2015. This is what "gradual" looks like in the real world. Government abuse gradually growing until it gets so big that it destroys itself.
Elsewhere in the world, "austerity" in Greece happened because they never fixed the problems until external forces had enough leverage to force reforms all at once. Notice that the parties complaining about said austerity are peculiarly disinterested in actually solving the problems that led to the austerity measure in the first place.
So sure, I'd love to do gradual reform. But we'll rarely get the opportunity for that. So I'd rather fire 720k government employees at a time than have no reform at all (and eventually destruction of the US instead).
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 29 2019, @06:02PM
By all means, fix the broken window - but study the successful approaches available for boiling a frog... same thing applies to the world economy. Idiots making big changes all at once don't accomplish their aims.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:32AM (1 child)
Bureaucrats work in the Coast Guard, patrolling & running our national parks, enforcing our borders, keeping the Presidential & former-Presidential families safe, act as scientists at the NIH/NASA/USGS/AWS, handle advanced IT tasks for all federal agencies, perform safety inspections for the USDA & OSHA, work in the field for FEMA during natural disasters, and so forth?
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:35AM
By "work in the Coast Guard" I was referring to the people out there performing rescues, patrolling the waters, and similar functions (relaying communications?), not asking if there are any bureaucratic jobs in the CG. :-p
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Saturday January 26 2019, @08:15AM (6 children)
Part of the reason Trump caved is that some major airports were turning traffic away today due to short staff in air traffic control. If the paychecks didn't start flowing, that was going to start happening all over the country.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Saturday January 26 2019, @05:01PM (5 children)
Guess what: next shutdown, it will happen much quicker.
Those essential employees discovered how powerful they were and next time, they will use that power to get their paychecks again much more quickly.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:12PM (3 children)
This is the Reagan disaster coming full circle. This karma has been almost 40 years in the making. How ironic...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @04:03AM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 28 2019, @05:21AM (1 child)
May you end up broke and homeless and unemployed so you can gain just a little perspective on the things you say...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @05:36AM
Why should that change my perspective? Unlike you, karma apparently doesn't feel the need to punish me for having unpopular opinions.
What happens when everyone else acts just as greedily as those long ago air traffic controllers who were fired by President Reagan? Society needs people who are willing to put their society ahead of their own selfish interests on occasion. I'm tired of hearing how a few well-paid federal employees should get all kinds of pampering and considerations just because they didn't have the foresight to handle a couple of delayed paychecks.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday January 27 2019, @06:44AM
And so they should! It's funny how Trump is a big capitalist right up until he asks over 100,000 people to work for free.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Username on Friday January 25 2019, @11:30PM (47 children)
Honestly, I didn't even know the federal government was shutdown. Why reopen anything? I want Trump to continue to veto, let congress pass the budget. If only we could shutdown the FBI and DEA and other shit organizations as well.
(Score: 3, Funny) by crafoo on Friday January 25 2019, @11:37PM (1 child)
You must have a private sector job and are not relying on other people's tax money to pay your rent.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @04:34AM
That's only like a majority of US households. What are the odds?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @11:55PM (37 children)
If we stopped paying public school administrators, it'd go a long way to fixing education in this country.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by darkpixel on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:08AM (33 children)
Abolish property tax. Forever.
Work your entire life to buy nice property and pay off a house, raise your family, etc... Then keel over at your desk and the government will throw your wife out on her ass for not paying "rent" on the property you already own.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:56AM (15 children)
1) Why would you when alive "pay 'rent' on the property you already own"?
2) That's one of the applications of life insurance
3) Terms and Conditions state that you will pay property tax or the property will be handed over to someone who will. Whether you call it "'rent' on the property you already own", "protection money", or "taxes" really doesn't matter.
(Score: 4, Informative) by hemocyanin on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:09AM (3 children)
He's saying you can never really "own" your property. Even if you have no mortgage, you have to pay property taxes every year or the gov't will swoop in, sell it at auction and evict you. That's just like what happens when you don't pay rent to a landlord so in essence, the ultimate landowner is the government -- we all just rent from it.
This is another way to think about sovereignty -- it's very hard to buy land AND sovereignty over that land. Until you can buy the latter, all you are ever buying when you buy land, is the right to rent it from the gov't.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:15AM
Well, I can [youtube.com], but ... well, there you go.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @05:29PM (1 child)
No shit. This is the real world, not sovereign fantasyland.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2019, @06:26PM
fuck you, you goddamn whore piece of shit. it's cowardly suck asses like you who perpetuate this bullshit. guess what bitch? you will likely see civil war in your lifetime and i hope you get what's coming to you for all your years of seditious boot licking.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Whoever on Saturday January 26 2019, @04:02AM (10 children)
Right, because you don't need fire service, police, roads, schools, etc. in your neighborhood.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:43AM (1 child)
And if you have an off-grid cabin in the sticks of Alaska where the only way in or out is by hiking, you still pay property taxes despite the lack of services.
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Saturday January 26 2019, @11:05AM
Alaska is a different story, because you get a check from the Alaska Permanent Fund.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:53AM (6 children)
Schools, no, I don't need those in my neighborhood, though adults who do procreate do.
There are other tax-based ways to fund schools, firefighters, police, etc. that could be more closely aligned with the person's funds, though. I'd be all for property taxes if they took personal circumstances into account the same way that income taxes supposedly do, and didn't let renters completely off the hook regardless of their financial circumstances. (If Richie Rich rents a fancy condo it means he won't have to pay property tax, while Granny Poor has to pay it because she lives in an old house close enough for her kids to visit & help her out every few days so she doesn't get stuck in a shitty far-away retirement home.)
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:59PM
Just to be clear, you do realize that LANDLORDS (and other property owners) pay property tax, right?
And most landlords take that into account when deciding what to charge for rent. In many locations, landlords even pay significantly higher taxes for a rental than for a property they live in. Given that they pass along that cost to renters, renters are often paying a lot more property taxes effectively than owners of their own houses.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Whoever on Saturday January 26 2019, @04:54PM (2 children)
Ah, so you are an incel.
You didn't attend public school, funded by other house owners when you were young?
You don't care about the value of your house? No schools == people move away, so your house becomes worthless.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:56PM
You've never been treated by a doctor who went to public school
You've never driven a car engineered by a public school alumnus
Your computer was completely designed by self-taught hardware gurus
Etc. etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2019, @06:29PM
you're an idiotic slave. you willingly send your kids off to be brainwashed by the state just like you obviously are. what a derelict fuck.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Saturday January 26 2019, @04:57PM
But they do. It's more like a wealth tax than an income tax. The more your house is worth, the more taxes you pay.
Move to a cheaper neighborhood if you want your taxes to drop.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @11:11PM
"Schools, no, I don't need those in my neighborhood, though adults who do procreate do."
Actually, yes you do, unless you like living in a shit hole of a ghetto.
(Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:42PM
OMG! Those are *gasp!* SOCIALIST programs!!!
/s?
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:24AM
Track this guy and tax his capital gains. And his booty. Illicit gains. Tax his White privilege! In fact, just tax him until he is dead, and then impose the death tax upon him. It's only fair.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @04:41AM (14 children)
Throw her on her ass along with a huge amount of money that was the value of your property. I don't see what the problem is supposed to be here. The government isn't here to protect lifestyles. If you can't afford the lifestyle, then develop a cheaper lifestyle.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Monday January 28 2019, @06:34AM (13 children)
What part of "my property" do you think means "government property"?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 28 2019, @03:25PM (12 children)
The part where you're not paying for the government you voted for your whole life. At least with property taxes, the cost is borne more by the ones who created the costs, zoned the zones, and did all the other things that resulted in property so highly priced that your wife can't afford to pay for it.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Monday January 28 2019, @03:37PM (10 children)
Prima Nocta is the price we pay for living in a civilized society.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @02:54AM (9 children)
Again, you and your wife want a fancy lifestyle, but you don't want to pay for it. Please drama it up all you want, but I don't have to agree with the premise.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Tuesday January 29 2019, @03:43AM (8 children)
I'm not saying you have to agree. You can believe the Earth is flat for all I care. It doesn't make it so.
Property taxes are am insidious form of slavery, they are immoral, and they institute socialism in America.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @05:40AM (7 children)
My view is that the most legitimate and moral sort of tax is a wealth tax. Property taxes are pretty close and hence, never going to be immoral in my book. Once again, you want to live in an expensive house, then you pay the piper. And contrary to your earlier assertion, I don't believe there is a more parsimonious way to pay for the services that property taxes pay for.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Tuesday January 29 2019, @05:58AM (6 children)
> Before it was some imaginary noble raping wives on their honeymoon night, now it's imaginary slavery. I wonder what non sequiturs will come next?
You're the one trying to justify acts of violence as being "part of living in a civilized society" or some other such nonsense. If you're willing to accept taxation as being the price we pay for living in a society, you should have no problems with prima nocta.
> My view is that the most legitimate and moral sort of tax is a wealth tax.
I'm betting you wouldn't know morality if it bit you in the ass.
I'm sure you've seen the memes "It's only illegal when you do it". That's taxation.
If I come over and demand a few thousand dollars at the point of a gun while threatening to throw you and your wife out on the street so I can sell your house, it's robbery. But it's legal when the government does it.
If I flash my lights at you, run you off the road, draw a gun on you and claim you were driving faster than some random number I made up, it's impersonating an officer, assault with a deadly weapon, kidnapping, false imprisonment, etc... But when the government does it, it's ok.
> Once again, you want to live in an expensive house, then you pay the piper.
Sure. I paid the contractor for the materials and his time and labor to construct it. What other piper needs to be paid?
> And contrary to your earlier assertion, I don't believe there is a more parsimonious way to pay for the services that property taxes pay for.
Perhaps that's your limitation to deal with. I grew up with a fire department that was privately funded by the neighborhood. You had the *freedom* to pay for their service or not. If they mismanaged funds, everyone could easily say "nope--I'm not paying anymore". Try doing that when the government mismanages funds.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 29 2019, @06:21AM (5 children)
Just like you don't?
Ok, so there seems to be this quasilibertarian viewpoint driving your posts. But you are in error on a couple of important points. First, it's not "I come over and demand a few thousand dollars at the point of a gun while threatening to throw you and your wife out on the street so I can sell your house", it's "I, appointed by the local community, come over and demand a few thousand dollars at the point of a gun while threatening to throw you and your wife out on the street so I can sell your house only taking that few thousand dollars while you and your wife keep the rest". There's a huge thing that gets missed here, namely only that small amount of money is seized.
On the second point, if someone doesn't have that power in a cartel or monopoly situation, then everyone has that power. It can work if the society is generally libertarian in outlook, but that's not the real world. You have a bunch of people who for whatever reason will use the power irresponsibly. And you have a bunch of people who will sacrifice freedom for security, even though that's frequently been a bad deal. People are far from perfect and for the libertarian viewpoint, the problem is that there's way too many people who won't respect libertarian ideals. At that point, you need someone to enforce the laws that most people won't enforce, or you won't have law.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Wednesday February 06 2019, @02:06PM (4 children)
I absolutely have a problem when the government (or anyone else) thinks they have a right to your body or your property.
"I, appointed by the local community"?!? That's contrary to liberty and the job of government in a representative republic as outlined in our Declaration of Independence.
...except I sold your house well below market value so I could quickly recoup the money I feel I'm owed and I don't care if I screw the people over in my quest to get "my money". But hey--who cares if we sell your $100,000 house out from under you over a pittance, right? I've been to tax sales.
Oh, I forgot we justify right and wrong based on amount. So rape is ok if you only rape just a little?
I disagree. If government disappeared tomorrow, I'm not somehow magically granted extra rights (you can't grant a right), and I'm not somehow magically granted extra privileges. If government didn't exist, murder would still be illegal, wrong, immoral, etc...
I can't agree more.
I won't claim to understand the libertarian viewpoint, but as I understand it, it's not lawlessness. The government's sole job is to protect and defend individual rights. So if someone steals from you or murders you, the government is supposed to intervene.
But I'm hoping you wouldn't chase me down in your car and demand money because I was doing 75 in a 70...we don't need those 'laws' enforced.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 08 2019, @02:11AM (3 children)
Indeed we do all the time. You can't rape a little, but you can tax a little.
I don't get the reason you're still posting. You claimed for some reason that property taxes was a particularly bad way to collect taxes. To the contrary, I think it's a good way to impedance match taxes, which I consider a necessary evil, to services used from the local government. That's just a matter of disagreement.
But this over-the-top complaint that your wife will have to sell the house and move somewhere else? I still don't believe the role of society is to protect wealthy peoples' life styles. Your wife would indeed be wealthy because of that property even if she doesn't have liquid assets. By merely selling the house and then moving somewhere cheaper (and possibly with a much lower property tax rate too!), your wife solves all the problems. And if she's stubborn enough that she'll refuse to pay taxes and force the state to take over the house and sell it for whatever. That's just bad decision making which is its own reward.
(Score: 1) by darkpixel on Friday February 08 2019, @03:46AM (2 children)
A little rape is wrong. A little theft is wrong.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 08 2019, @03:52AM
But a little rape is a huge amount of harm. A little theft is indeed little. Wrongness is not a bit flag you set.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 08 2019, @04:02AM
A great deal, of course.
Like allowing the rich and poor alike to sleep under a bridge? I'm using the tropes of socialism here, because there are real issues you aren't considering. Government is used for a number of services. As a result, it needs money. The rich (and property owners in general) use those services to a greater degree than those without.
So what of the things we spoke of, is this robin hood activity? Law enforcement, emergency services, roads, education?
Depends on the region. Property taxes didn't come out of nowhere [eh.net].
In other words, the use of property taxes by valuation existed before the US Constitution did.
You have yet to present a reason why it's supposed to be immoral. As to your 82 widow getting thrown on the street, she can just buy a home in a cheaper neighborhood and then she avoids that fate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2019, @06:31PM
they didn't create anything. they are parasites that need to die. just like the sycophants like you that support the status quo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2019, @06:37PM
hear, hear! a whole country of slaves who are so stupid they think they are free.
(Score: 1, Troll) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday January 26 2019, @03:05AM (2 children)
They're holding our Country back horribly, that's so true. We have an education system flush with cash but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge. But there's an answer. It's called Charter School. And I hired Betsy DeVos, she's a huge believer in Charter. She's blond. But she's very smart. She put her money on, it's called K12. Like Kindergarten and 12th. Grade, get it? It's a Company that, they're doing the Cyber Charter. Where kids don't go to school. The Cyber is their school. They have modern digital. And a kid, instead of going to school, they sit down in front of the digital. The online. Less money, more profit. And works much better. It's what they do.
And we're moving very strongly on the Education. On bringing our Education system into the 21st. Century. Bringing choice -- so important. We love choice. The right to choose. America First!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @07:30AM
FTFUs. Betsy is dumb as rock. She is more embarrassing, if this is possible, than Obama's Sec of Ed! Trump, and blondes. No wonder Nikki Haley had to go.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:18PM
It was fun watching Nancy castrate you.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:31AM (5 children)
Okay, let's shut down the whole government, including the military. Honorably discharge all our soldiers. End the wars, and bring the boys home, all of them. Close all our bases, foreign and domestic. Leave NATO. Cancel all our weapons programs, scrap our entire navy, air force, and army and marine vehicles and equipment, and sell all the nuclear bombs to the highest bidders. Let's do a total "Milexit". We'll save trillions, do you hear me? Trillions!
And let's shut down the Department of Homeland Security, including the Coast Guard and the border patrol. We can make a smart wall that doesn't need to be patrolled, how's that sound?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:46AM (1 child)
You need to do it slower, first just give them all the same day off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:11AM
huh? I don't understand this but boy did it make me giggle.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:49AM (2 children)
Most of that would be a good idea.
Just keep a handful of working nuclear missiles and subs. Merge the branches into DHS/border patrol, and use more robots and drones.
Sell redundant military assets on the cheap to Canada, Mexico, UK, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, and maybe a few others. Might as well throw some to Israel, so they can become/remain the big Middle East target. Do pull out of NATO, but arm up the NATO countries.
Take some of the hundreds of billions of savings and put some into NASA, NIH, NSF, and DARPA. Task DARPA with continuing or doubling down on research into computer chips, fusion, and robot warriors (which will become full-blown mechs if energy research pays off).
Later, if we want to stop being isolationist, we could use some kind of technology to disable or block nuclear strikes, while swarming our targets with robots and kinetic bombardments. Go ahead and fund a Space Force for that last one.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:40PM (1 child)
Some nice example of being dimwitted on display there....
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday January 26 2019, @03:25PM
Keep telling yourself that as you watch hundreds of billions of dollars being wasted every year.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Saturday January 26 2019, @05:53AM
You didn't notice any changes in large part because they've had around 50% of the employees working without pay to cover either the most essential tasks (leaving the somewhat-less-urgent for later), and/or trying to do both their own work and that of their absent co-workers. No different from when a company lays off a big chunk of its workforce, then demands that the remaining employees work harder/longer to compensate for it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Friday January 25 2019, @11:56PM (8 children)
What I find interesting is how the media is pumping the lack of TSA agents as the reason for airport slowdowns. They really, really don't want us to remember that we could do without TSA.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @12:04AM (4 children)
That isn't some narrative, lack of TSA agents is the actual reason for slowdowns. Everyone already knows the TSA is garbage, but getting the politicians to repeal the Patriot act and whatever other nonsense they shoehorned in is the actual problem.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Saturday January 26 2019, @03:24AM (3 children)
You just don't get it. The TSA is the slowdown. We boarded planes for decades without any TSA. The TSA came along, and the boarding became slower, and more miserable for everyone. Not to mention more hazardous. Anyone with an attitude* can now be arbitrarily sidelined into an interrogation room, and possibly never heard from again.
*For those who didn't know it, the TSA quickly measures passenger's attitudes on a Mark VI Attitudometer, accurate to fifteen decimal points. The process is all sciency, with no pseudoscience involved.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Knowledge Troll on Saturday January 26 2019, @04:42PM (2 children)
I got felt up by the TSA - not Kevin Spacey style but unwarranted action anyway. I was in a rush and didn't take all the paper crap out of my pockets that wont set off a metal detector. They caught that. Then I didn't get it all because I was also frustrated. They caught that too. That got me selected for some kind of more enhanced treatment.
They pulled me aside, made me wait for a few minutes, then an agent came over and rubbed my back a bunch. I didn't really enjoy it but I think he did.
I feel so much safer.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @06:59PM (1 child)
I've never not had a TSA agent check my back. I always bring a backpack when I fly and sweat accumulated under it. I'm wondering when they'll start checking that it's less than 3 ml.
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Saturday January 26 2019, @08:13PM
I wonder if it is the least effective thing to do by design. On the assumption the TSA is all theater then this lets them pretend to do something, actually touch you while doing it, and in one of the least offensive places possible.
I can't imagine what could be hidden on your back but I'm not much of a criminal or terrorist. But I understand theater a bit
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:09AM (2 children)
The TSA are the only thing keeping us from getting embroiled in unwinnable foreign wars against countries that never attacked us in the first place.
Back in the early 00's before we didn't have the TSA, and that is exactly what happened. Thousands of people died.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Saturday January 26 2019, @01:18AM
It was the reinforced cockpit doors wot done it.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:09AM
They are also responsible for smartphones, American Idol, and the Trump Presidency. After all, back before 2000 when there was no TSA, no-one had those either.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.