The Government Shutdown Countdown Lowdown MEGATHREAD

[merithyn]

In the past the workers have been compensated for all the pay they lost due to a shutdown.  All such pay is at the discretion of Congress, but I cannot imagine Congress making that kind of stink for themselves (accepting pay while they voluntarily sit out of their jobs, but denying it to other federal workers forced to sit out of their jobs because of Congressional failure).

And several House Republicans are already making noise that they will be happy to pay the backpay once the Democrats get out of their way.

This shut-down isn't going to save the gubm't a dime.

[derspiess]

So, how are the health insurance exchanges working out for people.

Remember when 11B4V was pretending to be a "moderate"?  How's that shtick working out?

He voted for Obama.

[Valmy]

actually i won; my government is not spending money it doesnt have today and i do not feel the loss of any service despite the media's hysteria this morning about my not being able to tour a federal park or get my passport renewed today

Um the Government has only been shut down for a few hours, I doubt you interact much with the Feds anyway much less on an hourly basis.

Anyway who the heck knows what the impact of this will be?  I am not even sure what agencies will actually be impacted and what the impact on the world economy and financial markets might be. 

[Valmy]

See, that cuts both ways.  It's fair to say most people don't want Obamacare repealed, but it's just as accurate to say most people don't want Obamacare implemented as it was written.

I have no idea what Obamacare actually says.  It is a bloated and ridiculously byzantine law.  All I know is that the Insurance Companies like it which probably does not bode well for me.

Of course the Republicans could have stepped in and had a larger say and moderated the bill but their grand strategy has been going for broke and all out victory.  The result is partially a result of their own political strategy.  Not that the bill would have been any less bloated or more comprehensible in any case.

[Valmy]

Michelle Obama is limiting her posts on Twitter due to the shutdown.  Not sure how that caused it, but that's a small win for the GOP-- and everyone else.

Eh I handle this by not following Michelle Obama on twitter.  People still freaking retweet the freaking White House all the time though.  Meh.

[garbon]

I don't go on twitter. I've been getting non-stop emails from twitter about them resetting my password as it has been hacked. Who bothers hacking the twitter account of someone like me?

[merithyn]

See, that cuts both ways.  It's fair to say most people don't want Obamacare repealed, but it's just as accurate to say most people don't want Obamacare implemented as it was written.

I have no idea what Obamacare actually says.  It is a bloated and ridiculously byzantine law.  All I know is that the Insurance Companies like it which probably does not bode well for me.

Of course the Republicans could have stepped in and had a larger say and moderated the bill but their grand strategy has been going for broke and all out victory.  The result is partially a result of their own political strategy.  Not that the bill would have been any less bloated or more comprehensible in any case.

This is really what pisses me off.  The Republicans could have - and still can - help make it a better bill for everyone. Instead of budging a milimeter, they're still trying to kill it. It just makes them look like total assholes who are ultimately trying to harm the US's bests interests.

I know that derspeiss isn't going to agree (and probably Yi) because they don't want any kind of socialized healthcare. The reality is that the US as a whole has to have something for the uninsurable or the costs will never be under control for everyone else. As it stands, the uninsurable keep racking up billions of dollars of medical care that everyone else has to pay through their own medical costs. Insuring everyone at least has the potential of spreading those costs out more equitably, and allowing the uninsurable some form of coverage.

[garbon]

See, that cuts both ways.  It's fair to say most people don't want Obamacare repealed, but it's just as accurate to say most people don't want Obamacare implemented as it was written.

I have no idea what Obamacare actually says.  It is a bloated and ridiculously byzantine law.  All I know is that the Insurance Companies like it which probably does not bode well for me.

Of course the Republicans could have stepped in and had a larger say and moderated the bill but their grand strategy has been going for broke and all out victory.  The result is partially a result of their own political strategy.  Not that the bill would have been any less bloated or more comprehensible in any case.

This is really what pisses me off.  The Republicans could have - and still can - help make it a better bill for everyone. Instead of budging a milimeter, they're still trying to kill it. It just makes them look like total assholes who are ultimately trying to harm the US's bests interests.

I know that derspeiss isn't going to agree (and probably Yi) because they don't want any kind of socialized healthcare. The reality is that the US as a whole has to have something for the uninsurable or the costs will never be under control for everyone else. As it stands, the uninsurable keep racking up billions of dollars of medical care that everyone else has to pay through their own medical costs. Insuring everyone at least has the potential of spreading those costs out more equitably, and allowing the uninsurable some form of coverage.

I think the only counterpoint, if you think we should have a revamp of healthcare, is that the current law, as is, is to f'd up to actually be a good base to start making changes from. To be honest though, it all is a bit above my comprehension (outside my immediate interest) that I don't really know enough to say if that's true or not.

Also, though on a whole it is pretty abysmal, I did like the recent SNL sketch with Obama trying to bring out people to help everyone understand the new impact law.

[Valmy]

I think the only counterpoint, if you think we should have a revamp of healthcare, is that the current law, as is, is to f'd up to actually be a good base to start making changes from. To be honest though, it all is a bit above my comprehension (outside my immediate interest) that I don't really know enough to say if that's true or not.

Yeah this is pretty much where I am to.  All I know is, as per usual, neither party is exactly covering themselves in glory here.

[grumbler]

Michelle Obama is limiting her posts on Twitter due to the shutdown.  Not sure how that caused it, but that's a small win for the GOP-- and everyone else.

Eh I handle this by not following Michelle Obama on twitter.  People still freaking retweet the freaking White House all the time though.  Meh.

Yeah.  I am amused by the fact that spicey follows Michelle Obama on twitter.

[derspiess]

I am amused that you think I do.

[garbon]

I'm just amused.

[grumbler]

I think the only counterpoint, if you think we should have a revamp of healthcare, is that the current law, as is, is to f'd up to actually be a good base to start making changes from. To be honest though, it all is a bit above my comprehension (outside my immediate interest) that I don't really know enough to say if that's true or not.

Bushcare is the base from which Obamacare is making changes.  The problem is that the Right-wing Republicans are happy with Bushcare, with its 10+% per-year cost increases, because the folks who own the right-wing Republicans are the ones pocketing the change.

Personally, i think that the health care system that should be the basis of the US health care discussion is the German one.  It is cheaper per capita (whole country, not persons covered) than Bushcare or Obamacare are in tax dollars right now, covers more than twice as many people, has a significantly higher satisfaction rate, has a reasonable opt-out provision, and produces a superior outcome.  The only thing wrong with it is that it doesn't allow infinite profits for the health care industry.  it seems like such a no-brainer that, while I can understand Congress not getting it, I don't understand why others (like the White House) don't get it.

[grumbler]

I am amused that you think I do.

And I am amused by you breathlessly reporting on her twitter posting habits, like any of us possibly care (maybe CdM, but I expect he also follws her, and so already knew).

I don't want to discourage your Timmay-like reports on celebrity twitter usage, though.  They are, as I note, amusing.

[garbon]

I think the only counterpoint, if you think we should have a revamp of healthcare, is that the current law, as is, is to f'd up to actually be a good base to start making changes from. To be honest though, it all is a bit above my comprehension (outside my immediate interest) that I don't really know enough to say if that's true or not.

Bushcare is the base from which Obamacare is making changes.  The problem is that the Right-wing Republicans are happy with Bushcare, with its 10+% per-year cost increases, because the folks who own the right-wing Republicans are the ones pocketing the change.

Personally, i think that the health care system that should be the basis of the US health care discussion is the German one.  It is cheaper per capita (whole country, not persons covered) than Bushcare or Obamacare are in tax dollars right now, covers more than twice as many people, has a significantly higher satisfaction rate, has a reasonable opt-out provision, and produces a superior outcome.  The only thing wrong with it is that it doesn't allow infinite profits for the health care industry.  it seems like such a no-brainer that, while I can understand Congress not getting it, I don't understand why others (like the White House) don't get it.

Presumably others have been purchased as well unless being owned is something that only happens to Republicans.

Also, I don't think Bushcare is going to catch on as a term.