Should federal workers strike ?

[corn18]

6 pages of arm waving.

[disneysteve]

6 pages of arm waving.

Not entirely. I think there was some good discussion here and managed to keep politics mostly out of it. That wasn’t easy since the entire shutdown was a political activity. It ended exactly how I expected though.

[~bs]

To be quite honest, I think posters did a really good job of keeping the discussion civil, regardless of their own personal beliefs. I think with the way we started off this year, the political posturing will only ramp up in intensity for the rest of the year.

[disneysteve]

To be quite honest, I think posters did a really good job of keeping the discussion civil, regardless of their own personal beliefs. I think with the way we started off this year, the political posturing will only ramp up in intensity for the rest of the year.

I agree on all points. And unfortunately, so much of what happens in politics very much affects us financially so it is often hard to separate the two when discussing the issues.

[Scallywag]

I was / am very concerned about the lunch program & special education services and just heard that if the shutdown had gone on for longer then the district had planned to pay for it out of it's own pocket. Problem is that we have a large reduced / free lunch population (and illegal or not, they're children and they need to eat) and the children with disabilities need access to school based therapies.

All said and done, given the amount of moolah involved to fund all these services, the district would have gone on empty after just a couple of months. We will need to rely on parents' generosity and the state's assistance if the feds shut down again so really hoping that never happens.

I pray that the teenagers at DC figure this out permanently. This will get really ugly really soon if they don't.

[disneysteve]

This wasn't the first shutdown and I'm certain it won't be the last. It was the longest, so hopefully that won't ever happen again. Not that short shutdowns aren't problematic too, but it was the duration of this one that really had a huge impact on so many people.

[kork13]

This wasn't the first shutdown and I'm certain it won't be the last. It was the longest, so hopefully that won't ever happen again. Not that short shutdowns aren't problematic too, but it was the duration of this one that really had a huge impact on so many people.

The one proposal I've seen that gives at least a modicum of some promise is that there has been some interest expressed in eliminating the possibility of government shutdowns, by creating a provision that automatically maintains funding at pre-existing levels in the event of a lapse in appropriations, with a slow decrement as time goes on (I think the proposal I saw was a 1% reduction every 2 weeks until actual appropriations are approved).

[creditcardfree]

The one proposal I've seen that gives at least a modicum of some promise is that there has been some interest expressed in eliminating the possibility of government shutdowns, by creating a provision that automatically maintains funding at pre-existing levels in the event of a lapse in appropriations, with a slow decrement as time goes on (I think the proposal I saw was a 1% reduction every 2 weeks until actual appropriations are approved).

Rand Paul's proposal was 1% lower every 90 days if no new appropriations is passed. So if a full year would go by, the spending levels for the year end up at 96% of the previous year spending. I think it's a good plan, but will it ever be considered or passed?

[kork13]

Rand Paul's proposal was 1% lower every 90 days if no new appropriations is passed. So if a full year would go by, the spending levels for the year end up at 96% of the previous year spending. I think it's a good plan, but will it ever be considered or passed?

That probably was it... As I was typing, I was thinking that a reduction every couple weeks seemed a little heavy-handed... lol

In the name of good governance? Now would be a good time to get something like that passed, after languishing for over a month in a shutdown. But will it actually happen? It likely would not be politically expedient. As we are already seeing, shutdowns almost always end up being politically advantageous for one party, and egg-in-the-face for the other. It's a gamble, but a powerful political play if you have the stones (and the unity of support, which in this case, the Democrats had in spades) to follow through with it.

[disneysteve]

As we are already seeing, shutdowns almost always end up being politically advantageous for one party, and egg-in-the-face for the other.

I heard a good commentary on the shutdown today. He said that in a shutdown, there is no winner. The American people lose for sure and both parties lose, only one loses more than the other. Nobody wins. That pretty much sums it up.

[~bs]

I heard a good commentary on the shutdown today. He said that in a shutdown, there is no winner. The American people lose for sure and both parties lose, only one loses more than the other. Nobody wins. That pretty much sums it up.

I swear, our lawmakers are acting like children. Barefaced gloating on one side, pouting on the other side. In this climate, how do they expect to resolve their differences in 3 weeks? Do you remember the "tea party" that emerged after the 2008 crisis? In this climate, especially if the economy goes into recession this or next year, I can see people being so fed up with the establishment that they start voting independent or for a renewed tea party. To be honest, I think a viable 3rd party or independent block of lawmakers is not a bad thing.

Rand Paul's proposal was 1% lower every 90 days if no new appropriations is passed. So if a full year would go by, the spending levels for the year end up at 96% of the previous year spending. I think it's a good plan, but will it ever be considered or passed?

It makes a lot more sense than this "stop and go" shutdowns. paralyzing government one minute, then full operations the next.

[~bs]

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/government-shutdown-cost-more-than-wall-demand-165956737.html

Government shutdown cost U.S. more than Trump's wall demand

Lost productivity from furloughed workers and weakened economic activity during the 35-day partial government shutdown cost the U.S. economy at least $6 billion, according to a new analysis from S&P Global Ratings.

[Captain Save]

1. My opinion is that I am a parent to a significantly disabled child and my son should not be held hostage because public employees are in dispute with their employer. As a tax payer I have already paid the feds' wages through my taxes.

2. The problem is not just a Republican president but also the Democrat opposition. Neither appears to care about the American people, especially the most vulnerable among us.

3. Suggesting that they hold the elderly, the disabled and the poor hostage to teach their deadbeat employer a lesson does not exactly earn them my respect. If Uncle Sam isn't paying your wages that's between you and Uncle Sam. What does my son have to do with this ?

How is your disabled child held hostage by the public employees?

[Captain Save]

We talk a lot about money and personal finance and we seem to focus solely on the money... We focus on saving, investing and insurance (in the traditional sense). We don't focus enough on being prepared for life.

Someone made a thread about Emergency fund... that is a great tool for being prepared. But I think we only focus on it because it involves MONEY. We also on insurance products because it involves money.

But how about being prepared for things that don't involve money... Being flexible is a form of insurance. having leverage is the ultimate financial tool you can have.


As an employee of any kind, you should have or at least work towards having leverage. You should be able to Strike knowing that if you lose your job, you have a plan B. A plan B is the ultimate leverage. Your employer knowing that you have a plan b will make them think twice about toying with your career.

I learned that the hard way.

(side note: The fact that we only on focus on things that involve MONEY has a lot to do with this modern day personal finance cliche coming straight from the finance industry... you are being brainwashed by the industry that you think you can't stand.)

[bennkar]

We talk a lot about money and personal finance and we seem to focus solely on the money... We focus on saving, investing and insurance (in the traditional sense). We don't focus enough on being prepared for life.

But how about being prepared for things that don't involve money... Being flexible is a form of insurance. having leverage is the ultimate financial tool you can have.

As an employee of any kind, you should have or at least work towards having leverage. You should be able to Strike knowing that if you lose your job, you have a plan B. A plan B is the ultimate leverage. Your employer knowing that you have a plan b will make them think twice about toying with your career.

I learned that the hard way.

Sounds like the philosophy of the Mr. Money Mustache crowd. I read that site a lot and certainly agree having a plan B or at least FU money certainly helps. Most people are not disciplined enough to do that however. I have been working on that area and really am there now - mostly working for my subsidized medical insurance at this time (as well as waiting for the golden handcuffs to fall off)

As an aside... I live near DC and my commute was great while the shutdown was on. Have to admit I am sorta rooting for it to happen again.