End of the world? nope, it's just another government shut down

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

@mobiusptc

@Samm

@mobiusptc

@Samm

@mobiusptc

funny you say that because the CBR specifically stated in that report that 3 billion of that is actually lost permanently.

Is the CBO counting the money saved by reducing the Budget?

in what year of P01135809 presidency(which was when the last 3 shutdown occurred and specifically what the CBO looked at) was the budget reduced?

Try to contain yourself. Trump has nothing to do with this conversation.

you are the one who brought it up. you asked the question about the budget being reduced…it was not, especially not when the GOP controlled both houses and the white house.
it is why i specifically mentioned that the GAO looked at the shutdown that occurred during that time period. how can the GAO count that if it never occurred?

so answer the question in what year was the budget reduced?

at least we are agreeing that shutdown cost money. the only debate is how much

The budget has almost never been reduced.

Now answer one of my questions: when has the left ever proposed LESS spending than the right?

easy

Biden faces squeeze on defense spending from Democratic hawks and doves

t the other end of the Democratic spectrum, progressives see this moment — seven months after Biden pulled the last U.S. troops out of Afghanistan — as a major opportunity. They want to cut the Pentagon’s budget and bolster spending on domestic programs to address the Covid pandemic, climate change, the high cost of child care and other issues.

“At a time when we are already spending more on the military than the next 11 countries combined, no we do not need a massive increase in the defense budget,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., a liberal icon who is the chair of the Budget Committee, said in a statement.

Three leaders of the House Progressive Caucus issued a joint statement calling it “simply unacceptable” that Biden wants record military spending in a period of Democratic rule after having ending the war in Afghanistan.

Many Democrats have long said the military budget is bloated with wasteful spending to build weapons and equipment that the Pentagon says it doesn’t need but that create jobs in the states and districts of influential lawmakers.

Fail.

Not the question asked.

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

Fail.

Not the question asked.

really? maybe you should have asked a more precise question because

@Steel-W0LF

left ever proposed LESS spending than the right?

the left, in the article, want less spending on military then the right.

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

It’s a break even naturally.

The same money is in the economy, and the govt doesn’t produce anything that builds wealth. There’s no other option for it to be than a total wash.

its not, both the CBO and the bipartisan senate report proves otherwise. you have a feeling that it must be a break even and yet the math does not work out that way. math trumps feelings

Wrong. Mathematically the opposite is true. They get their “losses” by assigning value to the sectors of the economy negatively affected. But don’t quantify those that had increased spending.

And you know the money had to have been spent because the government doesn’t save anything.

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

Fail.

Not the question asked.

really? maybe you should have asked a more precise question because

@Steel-W0LF

left ever proposed LESS spending than the right?

the left, in the article, want less spending on military then the right.

Did I say “less spending on the military”?

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

It’s a break even naturally.

The same money is in the economy, and the govt doesn’t produce anything that builds wealth. There’s no other option for it to be than a total wash.

its not, both the CBO and the bipartisan senate report proves otherwise. you have a feeling that it must be a break even and yet the math does not work out that way. math trumps feelings

Wrong. Mathematically the opposite is true. They get their “losses” by assigning value to the sectors of the economy negatively affected. But don’t quantify those that had increased spending.

And you know the money had to have been spent because the government doesn’t save anything.

that is what your feeling are telling you, the math in both the CBO and the senate report proves otherwise. do you have any proof at all that your math works out that way? any report or studies?

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

Did I say “less spending on the military”?

of course not hence why your question was a bad one. you say less spending. you did not specify if its overall spending, or specific spending. less military spending IS less spending according to your question.

so…ask a better one

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

Did I say “less spending on the military”?

of course not hence why your question was a bad one. you say less spending. you did not specify if its overall spending, or specific spending. less military spending IS less spending according to your question.

so…ask a better one

Better yet. Stop playing stupid.

[TommyLucchese]

Has this government shutdown bit ever worked for you guys and I mean ever? It’s happened, what, three, four times? And every time y’all go in it saying, “This is gold, Jerry! Gold!” and then in a month you’re screaming about how you didn’t shut down the government, it was the Democrats.

It’s caused the resignation of high ranking Republicans multiple times, including a Speaker. It has always failed to help Republican election prospects, and always actively hurt them. Why do it.

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

Did I say “less spending on the military”?

of course not hence why your question was a bad one. you say less spending. you did not specify if its overall spending, or specific spending. less military spending IS less spending according to your question.

so…ask a better one

Better yet. Stop playing stupid.

now now, no need to get personal. ask a better question and get a better answer

[Steel-W0LF]

@TommyLucchese

Has this government shutdown bit ever worked for you guys and I mean ever? It’s happened, what, three, four times? And every time y’all go in it saying, “This is gold, Jerry! Gold!” and then in a month you’re screaming about how you didn’t shut down the government, it was the Democrats.

It’s caused the resignation of high ranking Republicans multiple times, including a Speaker. It has always failed to help Republican election prospects, and always actively hurt them. Why do it.

I don’t really care whose fault a shutdown is.

I wish they’d do them more often.

[TommyLucchese]

@Steel-W0LF

I don’t really care whose fault a shutdown is.

I wish they’d do them more often.

I’ve watched you, personally, two or three times say this same thing and then two weeks into the shutdown it was the Democrats who did it, as the economy spirals out of control. Republicans had nothing to do with it.

Then you give up anyway and the Democrats beat you to death with it for the next year. What is the point?

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

Did I say “less spending on the military”?

of course not hence why your question was a bad one. you say less spending. you did not specify if its overall spending, or specific spending. less military spending IS less spending according to your question.

so…ask a better one

Better yet. Stop playing stupid.

now now, no need to get personal. ask a better question and get a better answer

If the shoe fits……

We’ve all seen this act, if it is one, by you in the past.

So the answer is no. I won’t rephrase an obvious question. I’ll tell the person playing dumb games that Stevie Wonder can see to quit acting like a tool.

[Steel-W0LF]

@TommyLucchese

@Steel-W0LF

I don’t really care whose fault a shutdown is.

I wish they’d do them more often.

I’ve watched you, personally, two or three times say this same thing and then two weeks into the shutdown it was the Democrats who did it, as the economy spirals out of control. Republicans had nothing to do with it.

Then you give up anyway and the Democrats beat you to death with it for the next year. What is the point?

No

You haven’t.

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

So the answer is no. I won’t rephrase an obvious question. I’ll tell the person playing dumb games that Stevie Wonder can see to quit acting like a tool.

cool i accept your surrender =)

[Steel-W0LF]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

So the answer is no. I won’t rephrase an obvious question. I’ll tell the person playing dumb games that Stevie Wonder can see to quit acting like a tool.

cool i accept your surrender =)

Sure. If that makes you sleep better at night I don’t care. I stopped caring what you guys thought a long time ago.

[mobiusptc]

@Steel-W0LF

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

So the answer is no. I won’t rephrase an obvious question. I’ll tell the person playing dumb games that Stevie Wonder can see to quit acting like a tool.

cool i accept your surrender =)

Sure. If that makes you sleep better at night I don’t care. I stopped caring what you guys thought a long time ago.

Sure sure.

[Samm]

@mobiusptc

@Samm

Again … The budget that passes and the budget that is proposed are two different things.

And we are not agreeing that a shutdown costs money. The same amount of money is in the economy regardless, it’s just in different hands.

your question makes no sense. the GAO did the analysis after the shutdown. why would it use budget numbers that did not pass?
both the GAO and the Senate report confirm that shutdown cost irretrievable billions. the only question is how much. no matter what your gut feeling tells you, it does not override factual numbers

The GAO figure is for the Federal Fiscal Year. Long term the shutdown has zero net effect to the National economy,

But again … Holding out to eventually pass a Budget that has a smaller deficit than the initial proposed Budget, saves the economy money because the deficit is mostly borrowed from foreign investors. The difference between the two saves the economy money that the GAO and the CBO do not account for.

[Samm]

@Steel-W0LF

Fail.

Not the question asked.

So typical …

[mobiusptc]

@Samm

The GAO figure is for the Federal Fiscal Year. Long term the shutdown has zero net effect to the National economy,

tell me you havent read the report without tell me .

CBO’s estimates do not incorporate other, more indirect negative effects of the shutdown,
which are more difficult to quantify but were probably becoming more significant as it
continued. For example, some businesses could not obtain federal permits and
certifications, and others faced reduced access to loans provided by the federal
government. Such factors were probably beginning to lead firms to postpone investment
and hiring decisions. In addition, risks to the economy were becoming increasingly
significant as the shutdown continued. Although their precise effects on economic output
are uncertain, the negative effects of such factors would have become increasingly
important if the partial shutdown had extended beyond five weeks

Because of the five-week partial shutdown, federal outlays, revenues, and other
collections were lower than they would have been otherwise. With the resumption of
funding, CBO expects that nearly all of the spending that did not occur during the
shutdown will be made up but that the government will probably not fully recoup all of
the revenues and other collections that it lost during the shutdown.

[Samm]

@mobiusptc

@Steel-W0LF

Fail.

Not the question asked.

really? maybe you should have asked a more precise question because

@Steel-W0LF

left ever proposed LESS spending than the right?

the left, in the article, want less spending on military then the right.

… so they could spend even more on social crap. That’s an annual ritual for the libs. The issue at hand here though, is the bottom line of what the left wants greater or smaller than what the right wants to spend.