The Fed Shutdown Poll and Megathread

[Hansmeister]

I hope you don't get paid this month.

Aren't you supposed to be in your basement, curled up in the fetal position?

[Razgovory]

I hope you don't get paid this month.

Aren't you supposed to be in your basement, curled up in the fetal position?

I am.

[Admiral Yi]

I think what Yi is probably trying to say is that it's akin to a strawman proposal.

Not at all.  I think it's a serious proposal.  The numbers are real, there's no smoke and mirrors, no trillions of dollars of waste and abuse.  Just because you think the specific items in the proposal are not optimal does not render it fantasy.  I think 1/3 tax increases and 2/3 spending cuts would be about right.  But I don't think that anything that strays from that is coo coo for cocoa puffs.

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical? 

At some point the Democrats are going to have to stop preaching to the choir about how essential the National Cowboy Poetry Festival is to the very fabric of our society and join the debate on deficit reduction.  (Or if they think the deficit is hunky dory, and we can keep running 10% deficits indefinitely, they can try to make that case.) 

[Admiral Yi]

If you want to think of them as simply intellectually dishonest, that's fine too.

Not it's not.

[The Minsky Moment]

I hope you don't get paid this month.

Aren't you supposed to be in your basement, curled up in the fetal position?

Raz has taught himself to perform a variety of basic and complex functions while curled in a fetal position.  Eventually, his feats will transform our understanding of fetal capabilities and revive the anti-abortion movement.

[CountDeMoney]

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical?

It's certainly more equitable.

[grumbler]

Is it really all that, just ideological? Or is that the Democrat Caucus talking points? Nothing good or useful in it? Nothing the Dems can debate? Have the Dems put a plan on the table at all??

I am no democrat, and I see nothing in Ryan's plan but CYA bullshit.  To be fair to him, his plan was only issued because the Republicans realized how silly it was of them to whine that the Democrats had no plan, when they didn't have one either.  Ryan couldn't recommend real solutions because his party hasn't any idea what real solutions they would find acceptable, any more than the Democrats do.

This issue needs a McCain-style "Gang of X" backbenchers to take charge.  There are no adults sitting at the negotiations table right now, just a bunch of political hacks hoping that the agony they are inflicting on the nation will be blamed on their enemies.

And, no, the Democrats have put no plan on the table.  I don't think they have anything like the leadership needed to create such a plan, or even a plan for how to take a dump.  the solution to the nation's problems won't come from the Democratic "leadership," that's for sure.

[grumbler]

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical? 

The latter is the way it works in the world.  Health care price inflation doesn't exist magically.  It exists because it is extraordinarily profitable to the health care industry that it exist.

[grumbler]

At some point the Democrats are going to have to stop preaching to the choir about how essential the National Cowboy Poetry Festival is to the very fabric of our society and join the debate on deficit reduction.  (Or if they think the deficit is hunky dory, and we can keep running 10% deficits indefinitely, they can try to make that case.)

I think you are right, to the extent that some democrats are going to have to talk turkey about exactly what they mean by deficit reduction.  But at some point the Republicans are going to have to accept that budget negotiations need to be about budgets, and stop wrecking every deal with some bogus policy riders that go from nowhere to being "non-negotiable."

I think the leadership on each side is wrecking the chances for compromise deliberately, because each sees the other as getting more bones broken when the train goes off the rails.

[Neil]

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical?

It's certainly more equitable.

Wouldn't it be equitable to somehow split the cost?

[CountDeMoney]

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical?

It's certainly more equitable.

Wouldn't it be equitable to somehow split the cost?

No.  50% from octogenarians versus 50% from the medical services industry? Nope.

[jimmy olsen]

Obama threatens to veto GOP budget extension plan

That seems really politically risky to me. He does that won't he get the blame for the shutdown that follows?

[Razgovory]

Obama threatens to veto GOP budget extension plan

That seems really politically risky to me. He does that won't he get the blame for the shutdown that follows?

They didn't blame Clinton for the shutdown in the 1990's.  The Republicans are doing the same thing before and hoping for a different outcome.  I think Obama is being smart politically, but policy wise it does nothing.

[Neil]

Take the Medicare proposal for example.  Ryan's is radical.  Seniors would basically eat the cost of health care price inflation.  But compare that to Bowles-Simpson, in which the medical services industry would eat it instead.  Is that somehow less radical?

It's certainly more equitable.

Wouldn't it be equitable to somehow split the cost?

No.  50% from octogenarians versus 50% from the medical services industry? Nope.

Yes it would.  That's what equitable means.  As the health care industry discovers ever more expensive and counter-productive means of extending human life, it seems reasonable that those who take advantage of them pay for the privilege.

[jimmy olsen]

Obama threatens to veto GOP budget extension plan

That seems really politically risky to me. He does that won't he get the blame for the shutdown that follows?

They didn't blame Clinton for the shutdown in the 1990's.  The Republicans are doing the same thing before and hoping for a different outcome.  I think Obama is being smart politically, but policy wise it does nothing.

Clinton didn't veto a budget extension did he? IIRC he just let the Republicans cut their own throat. Am I wrong?