Why do we have possible government shutdowns every month now?

[YesterdaysChild]

Why is it that our Government can't control their spending? What do you think can be eliminated from their budget, or what needs to be added that we are at least getting benefits from?

[BCA6010]

In very simplified terms:

For over two decades, Congress has had no regulation whatsoever forcing them to balance the budget. The result is that we now have either a majority, or a huge demographic sitting in the house who have not even been in politics long enough to remember what that was like, and older ones convinced that there basically aren't any repurcussions at least to themselves. This is continuously expoited by labeling everything a crisis no matter how absurd or relatively minor.

Furthermore, we have massive corruption within virtually all aspects of federal budgeting from military to healthcare and education, so we are spending huge dividends in all of them with significantly lesser value per capita than other countries. This was on full display when about 80% of the house and Senate were receiving kickbacks from pharma during COVID, and again from defense contractors with the war in Ukraine. Of course if you threaten to clamp down on any of it as either a sitting member or an independent activist, you'll get labeled the usual things.

We also have unsustainable welfare type programs that were poorly developed at the time of implementation as a gimmicky way to buy votes, and completely unfeasible now that our population is much higher, people are living longer, and benefits apply to a wider range of people for various reasons. Just like the above, there's also a lot of government bloat and corruption here too. Due to the fact that these programs hit voters directly, it's generally political suicide to make any serious effort to try and reign them in.

And lastly but certainly not the least concerning, this is all also a major reason why a big chunk of politicians from both parties are pushing hard for a central bank digital currency, which they believe crashing the economy will justify the implementation of. By directly regulating all financial transactions and manipulating the value of currency, the government could for example ration your ability to buy food or gas, limit your ability to travel or move, and pad their own coffers to pay for programs and their beneficiaries. There are exactly zero examples of a CBDC-type overhaul not being a net negative for the general population whenever it is implemented, and it's almost always brought in under the guise of stopping out of control inflation and spending.

[MrOracle]

The Biden administration has been borrowing, printing, and spending like a drunken, spoiled teen girl with daddy's credit cards. We're now involved in 2 wars, which the administration has been pouring endless billions into (which US taxpayers have to pay for), and have done exactly nothing to resolve, because nothing is better for putting money into the pockets of their own families and, of course, their major campaign donors, than war.

Trump was endlessly criticized for going around to various countries where conflicts were brewing and working out peace agreements and heading off war. But that's also exactly what the establishment - including many establishment Republicans - didn't want - and was the PRIMARY reason the establishment was so anti-Trump. Every administration from George HW Bush to Obama was part of the establishment and could be counted on to support war, funded by the US middle class. Hillary was supposed to win and continue the wars that had been so carefully set up - but Trump disrupted all those plans and lots of "important people" lost huge amounts of money and influence because they could no longer control or siphon off war funds. That was unacceptable.

It's the lower and middle class who get maimed and killed in war, along with civilians of course, and largely the middle class who funds them, but it's the elites who profit - with tons of inside trading being the norm in government and no motivation for anyone to investigate since most on both sides are involved.

This is why establishment politicians should not be supported. Without these endless wars and the resultant high taxes and massive inflation, the lower and middle class would have 3-4 times the spending power over the last 40 years. That's how diluted our money has become, and it's largely war that's responsible. If you can't afford a car or house, it's the establishment supporting wars that is most responsible. Remember that before you vote them back into office.

[SixFootSexy]

100% correct.
20-year war on terror: $8 trillion and 900,000 deaths
We pulled out of Afghanistan in the worst possible way.
Made fools of America.
Left the armaments and control to our enemies.
https://www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar

How much good would that money have done building better infrastructure in the US?
For positive change?
The corruption is unreal.

[slatyb]

Trump ran up a huge deficit with tax cuts for the rich. Definitely don't matter when Republicans are in charge, they cut takes on the wealthy. Them win they are out of office different dedicated are a problem.

[SixFootSexy]

@slatyb George Bush got us in the most expensive, stupid war imaginable. The US will suffer the consequences for years to come. The goal is to make sure everyone in the 99% is in debt and eternally renting, otherwise it would be illegal for banks to buy up homes to use as AirBnB's.

[slatyb]

@SixFootSexy The Bush war deficit is true.

[Radiate143]

Because debt creates growth in The Ponzi scheme FIAT economy. If there is no debt the economy shrinks. Most wealth is fake. When the bubble bursts, the steal the mo ey from the poor to keep their little scheme going.

[jamesgoldman]

Exactly why the smart people buy and hold gold, I recall buying my gold panda at a significant premium and my antique dealer saying I'd never seen a return, today I could make 35% over what I paid for it

[Radiate143]

@jamesgoldman well see there is an issue with the gold. They are purposely suppressing the price of gold.

After WW2 the world, stupidly, decided to let America hold their gold reserves at Fort Knox.

I would never trust America with this but they did. It's unlikely that everyone's gold is still in there if there is any left at all.

So they are propping this up as long as they can because if everyone now says, we want our gold because this FIAT thing is really done... America is really screwed. But not really be ause they will just do what they ways do and gaslight other countries saying they are the problem, terrorists, human rights bla blah blah, and bomb them to kingdom come.

Gold is nice but holding land is where it's at. It's a long game but it is it. Especially right now.

[jamesgoldman]

Land is good but you need 5/6 figures for that... entry into gold can be around $500

China is the big league with gold officially they have 3 or 4 thousand tonnes... unofficially about 10 times that

[Radiate143]

@jamesgoldman gold is ok. It's too manipulated. But yes you need money for land.

[jamesgoldman]

Indeed say a step towards land

[Radiate143]

@jamesgoldman yes, I agree.

[katiesmuff]

It's a game played by a huge gang of elected thieves!

[Lynx122]

Your system of government doesn't work.

Every relevant thing has been corrupted. And no politician wants to deal with the backlash of raising taxes or cutting spending. So they just punt the problem away. And the people have so little power that there's no consequences. Your country has been spiraling downwards for a long time but there's things that are keeping it afloat. But at some point these pillars will reach their limit and there will be an epic collapse. Your entire life you've been basically living a subsidized life by all this debt that's been piling up. The economy has always been doing better than it actually was because of the extra spending. And also the dollar being an important currency, the petrodollar in the past etc. There have been so many things that have boosted the U. S. economy that didn't have to do with actually providing value and running businesses well. But at some point the good times will run out the question is just when will it happen? I already saw these trends 15 years ago when I was young and interested in politics and I saw things were going downhill but the shit still hasn't hit the fan yet. It could take another 20 years for it to happen but it will happen at some point. But it won't just be a regular recession it will change the country for ever.

[Soteris]

That is not how that works at all. The budget is already agreed upon. They already voted to spend this money, they are just refusing to raise an arbitrary "debt limit" that they already knew they would have to raise when they initially voted for the budget.

The government shutdowns is all for political show even thought it directly hurts USA and its people. In fact, the debt limit itself is a really stupid piece of legislation that should just be removed as it serves no purpose outside of undermining the state. It does not control spending in any way, shape or form. It simply gives a minority of the politicians the power to hold USA hostage for their own political and financial benefit.

[strateguy632]

for you, the comparison to the house hold budget would help. the point is biden needs to spend much less.

[Soteris]

@strateguy632 No. That is stupid and has nothing to do with why the government shuts down every month or so.

The debt limit is an arbitrary limit that the government puts on itself. If we use that household budget as an example it would be like you being behind on your bills this month by 100 dollars but you have written in your diary that you would only allow yourself to pay 99 dollars in debt and unless you change what you wrote in your diary you have decided to go bankrupt. For reasons.

It is stupid. It is arbitrary, and it helps no one.

[Joshydavid25]

"The government shutdowns is all for political show even thought it directly hurts USA and its people."

It definitely does not hurt the people, it'll help the people if the government actually did shut down.. Maybe the economy could actually heal and so could inflation..

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 Wait, are you insane? Even ignoring that USA would not exist without the federal government, do you have any idea of just how many people are reliant on the Government functioning day to day? People would start dying.

Its also insane to assume the economy or inflation would recover. They won't. Both the US economy and the dollar would be destroyed eventually.

There is nothing good that comes from a government shutdown. All it does is let politicians hold USA as hostage for their own benefits, nothing more.

[Joshydavid25]

"do you have any idea of just how many people are reliant on the Government functioning day to day?"

And that's a problem.. The government wants us to rely on them.. So that they can get more and more power and control over our lives.. Our Founding fathers wanted to make sure we had a little government as possible, but only enough to help lead people into a new world.. Today the government is too big, and many of those officials don't really do anything.. Or just make our lives more complicated..

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 That is not at all what the founding fathers wanted. They had no problems with people relying on the government, their problem was that the government could not be trusted. Also, I dont particularly care what the founding fathers wanted as they were mostly wrong on things in the first place and thus not particularly relevant to today.

[Joshydavid25]

They came from Oligarchy.. So of course they wanted as little government reliance as possible.. Which is why they created term limits.. Which is why George Washington didn't want to be King.. It's also why only land owners originally were the only people to vote Federally.. But besides that the government doesn't know what's best for the people like the people do.. The best role the government can give us is the role of guardian oversight.. Meaning have as little interference as possible , while protecting the people from the background.. They are the reason they have these problems today..

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 That is complete nonsense. First of all, the UK was not really an Oligarchy, the founding fathers had nothing against government reliance as it was about representation and trust issues in the institutions and term limits only favors corruption.

The problem with term limits is that it favors organized groups and few things motivates organization as a profit motive so corrupt individuals will have their own group backing them up and helping them stay in power. You might have heard the term "revolving door" or whatever, that is part of this.

You "Small government conservatives" have really gone off the deep end quite frankly and you make no sense anymore since you lack fundamental understanding of the issues.

[Joshydavid25]

"The problem with term limits is that it favors organized groups and few things motivates organization as a profit motive so corrupt individuals will have their own group backing them up and helping them stay in power. You might have heard the term "revolving door" or whatever, that is part of this."

Sir now that doesn't make any sense.. That's why we allow voting to be investigated and monitored so that certain groups don't take advantage of it. So what are advocating that there are no term limits? And you're also advocating for bigger government? And yet would probably be the same ones constantly complaining that your "officials" aren't doing enough.. It seems you lack fundamental understanding.. Of course they had nothing against a certain amount of government reliance I. E to keep things in order, but not like it is today.. Making Restrictions and having red tape over things.. Look at what governments do around the world, and how they make or break nations.. And we want more government? You really have gone off the deep end.. Also I'm not a conservative..

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 Yes, lets look at countries all over the world. The most successful of which have what you would consider "big governments" with all but one of them (USA) having things like universal healthcare as an example.

Countries with "small governments" are generally countries that can't maintain a larger one for various reasons such as their nations being undeveloped and/or a failed state. As such, small governments are generally countries that does not have a choice.

Even if what you are suggesting would work, which I for one do not think it would, its not something we really have a real world example of either so if nothing else I would caution you against major changes in that direction since its going contrary to established norms of how a government and country should function.

Likewise the only reason I could see for the founding fathers to prefer a "small government" at the time is because it was a new country and an undeveloped nation that would never have been able to administratively support anything like the government you have today. Things like the "Wild West" for example is good to demonstrate the limited reach of the government during those times and the struggle to do things like establish postal services or railways as basic infrastructure.

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 As for corruption in politics? It has virtually nothing to do with tampered voting. Look into gerrymandering for the closest real world parallel I suppose. What I am talking about is the corruption of politicians, not how they are voted in. Thanks to term limits you need to "quickly" cycle through new presidents which means there will always be new faces that you dont necessarily know beforehand.

As such you have less knowledge about their past record like if they had scandals or if they are corrupted and by the time you figure that out their term is already up and there is a new face in the presidency. It gives you very little chance to actually do anything to combat corruption as a voter. Furthermore, it means you will require a line of people to keep filling that position which is very easy to do if you are in charge of corrupting politicians and can choose who to elevate next as a candidate for president.

Because of this a group of corrupted politicians will have a much easier time to put forward another corrupt choice than anyone else have to elevate someone with actual integrity. Even if you do manage to elevate a Trump or Bernie or Obama or Mitt Romney or whoever you personally think is a person of integrity, that will just be a short term victory since the Term limit will kick them out of office like anyone else and send you back to square one while the corrupted group already have their alternative ready to go.

Lastly I call you a conservative because you are supporting conservative ideology such as small governments and trying to literally follow the teachings of the founding fathers.

[Joshydavid25]

"The most successful of which have what you would consider "big governments" with all but one of them (USA) having things like universal healthcare as an example."

Most countries, even the bad ones have a big government or bigger government.. It's definitely not indictive of a country's success in fact.. Look at China, the government held it back for years and the people figured out how to make money.. When the government finally loosened up , that's when things in certain areas began to prosper.. Same with America.. We are not as business friendly as we should be because of all the redtape and unnecessary certifications you gotta have.. Whereas other countries have less redtape and you can start a business off the whim.. Also The U. S has a mixed healthcare system causing all types of problems.. Just like we have a mixed economic system..

Also four years is plenty of time to look someone up.. Career politicians f@$k things up for us.. Getting a President that actually worked as an everyday person would do us some good.. It's why I don't get why people are into the tradition of a President having a political career before he's President.. Many of those politicians are corrupt and take all types of side deals.. On both sides..

I am right leaning yeah, but that doesn't mean I'm conservative.. Not anymore at least..

[YesterdaysChild]

@Joshydavid25 I agree with the government wanting complete control over us. You notice that mostly all of this spending is done without us being able to vote on it. When the populace has no say, it is akin to having a dictatorship.

[Joshydavid25]

Yes ma'am.. 💯%..

[Soteris]

Lady, you are living in a representative democracy. As the founding fathers intended I might add. That means that you do not vote for anything directly such as budgets or spending or even laws. You vote for representatives who then move on to vote in your place on these issues. That is the system working as intended.

This is also not the same thing as a dictatorship. Again, you are living in a representative democracy. That means you have certain responsibilities in who you vote to become your representation since what they are doing is done in YOUR name. If they are abusing their power then that is because you let them. Trying to claim that you have "no say" in the matter and trying to wash your hands of the responsibility that you actually have as a voter is quite frankly the problem with democracies.

[Soteris]

@Joshydavid25 Yes it is actually indicative of a nations success. To my knowledge modern national success has only ever come from overt government action rather than the government "opening up". Even your China example works against you since the Chinese government has direct control over every aspect of their economy and trade, it is not a free or open market. Of course China is not a good place by any means but trying to use it as an example of economic success directly contradicts your beliefs. Same with USA, most of your economy is supported directly or indirectly by the government.

As for "red tape" and "certifications", they are necessary for open markets. Without certifications you can't for example export products to other countries and without standards both in products and how businesses are run you can't ensure that every business operate fairly and that there is a chance for competition. Remove these and you will just create monopolies in a spiraling economy.

And no, 4 years is nothing on a national scale. If a politician came out saying they would open new nuclear power plants or extend the railroad network or negotiate free trade with the EU then you would not even be halfway through the process before those first 4 years were up even if you had everything pre-planned and ready to go on the first day.

Furthermore, we are talking about regular people here. Unless there is a major news story then they will not actually look up what their representatives or president is actually doing while in power. If they actually took their duty as voters seriously and looked into the voting records and minutia of politics then I might be inclined to agree with you but that is a different reality than we live in.

[NathanDavis]

it is just another, political and intended tool... in which both of the sides try to win a pulse against the other...

it's just like that chicken game.. in which both parties want to get their way and one has to, eventually, give up and concede...

why do they do it every month now? because they can...

they know very well that they could do this all the time and keep doing it, and that we are still going to vote them anyway and let them continue with their shit show... lol

[strateguy632]

far from a chicken game this has REAL consequences as the debt grows. and the credit companies stop trusting to lend.

[NathanDavis]

@strateguy632 except, it isn't...

these used to be rare... and now they happen even multiple times a year, the economy in general is still fine

so yeah, this is just a political tool they use to play pulse, nothing else

also... if you mean the national debt, that's not a real issue either... if you owe money to yourself, your economy won't get worse... and you're not going to get richer either, it is your own money

and if you're thinking national debt towards foreign countries... the US holds more debt from foreign countries that it owes to foreign countries, the moment they come to collect, the USA would do the same and then restrict future loans and trade, which is why foreign countries just will "never" try to be "funny" about debt

[trexxx707]

Because Republicans are anti gov and want every aspect of it to fail so that they can point to the failures and say "see, big government doesn't work, we should cut all funding to that thing we made fail! "

Remember republicans in Congress basically have no actual policies or solutions to any actual problems the American people are facing. They don't want to fix anything, they just want to hurt anyone outside their circle because they are motivated by fear and propaganda and conspiracy nonsense.

[Joshydavid25]

I think you are confusing with the Democrats.. Throwing more money at a solution and scaring the people against the other side to get more power seems to be their go to.. Also the government does nothing but eventually ruin things.. If the government got their hands out of everything, it would run a bit smoother.. The smaller the government, the more power the people have..

[YAsQuen]

Abolish the federal bureau of education

Abolish CIA NSA FBI. Start over from scratch

Retract any military Aid to foreign countries

STOP as many active wars as possible (Syria)

NASA gets more than back in Moon Mission days. GTFO fly to the moon/mars or get cut in half

Simplify and or streamline paying taxes (its kept complicated on purpose)

Abolish CDC start from scratch

SELL a few millitary bases (relinquishes upkeep and gives cash)

CUT Government politician/officials benefits (free travel, medicine) They are getting paid a salary and they all are corrupt anyways and make their money that way aswell

DONT PAY FOR COLLEGE

KICK OUT 5-15 Million Illegals and BUILD the WALL

DRILL AND FRACK OIL

Just a few Ideas from someone that doesn't know anything. Its pretty clear that they are doing this on purpose as to enable a communist takeover. God Save America.

[NamerOfStars]

Over a century without a championship, and the games STILL sold out.

When there's no incentive to perform well, performance is poor. Sports or politics, it makes no difference.

[strateguy632]

actually that was how the rnc retook The house.

[NamerOfStars]

@strateguy632 And look at all they've done with it. Until third parties start getting elected, neither really stands to lose anything- so there's no need for them to EARN the voters' loyalty.

[Kabluie]

The house basically has the purse rights to the government, and it's used as leverage for the majority party to get what they want from the other side and the President. Happens more often now because congress in-general is a circus and neither party gets along. Yet there is so much support for stuff like making daylight savings time permanent and the house can't even muster that across the finish line.

[love_conquers_lust]

They’re always over budget. They can never spend enough.

[YesterdaysChild]

So it seems.

[strateguy632]

the problem is HOW MUCH over budget. other countries only 35 borrowing but here double. biden is being very reckless but what does he or obama? care it tax payer money.

[strateguy632]

we have possible government shutdowns every month now, due to the huge debt... as you said and showed well the spending is outrageous. your method of comparison to household would help if people would not be so political.

[AviatorTom]

We have only ourselves to blame... for electing the same people over and over, who are more interested in the power than wield than in helping people, which is what government is supposed to do.

[normalice]

Because republicans want shutdowns. They operate under the assumption that if the government isn't giving more money to the rich, then it doesn't need to be doing anything at all.

[exitseven]

Because none of the politicians that we voted into office can stop spending money we do not have.

If anyone ran a business like these people run our government they would have been fired long ago.

[Surely]

Whenever you have lifelong politicians with Pork Barrel spending agendas. This is what you end up with!
The politicians won’t pass term limits. So the voters need to wise up and vote them out!

[Fireguy17]

The politicians both parties are guilty, spend way too much and run out of money, and then the games begin.

This is nothing new.

It's been going on for a long time.

[Andres77]

Foreign aid and welfare for those that are using it as income, and not as a helping hand

[strateguy632]

i recall in trumps first year he started limiting foreign aid to many countries. he understood money as a business man. biden policy shows he wants to weaken u. s. for china who want u. s. weakened... why do you think he earned the name china- joe?

[RedInnocent68]

Because Republicans like to be bullies and think they’re proving a point, but it’s little more than masturbation, since historically they’re proportionately more responsible for running up the debt.

[strateguy632]

you cannot know INTENTIONS but they are using a tool that existed for a purpose. the comparison to the household budget here can help you.

[Staximus]

They don't care because it's not their money

[YesterdaysChild]

Pretty sure they (Congress and President) get paid even if the government gets shut down. They aren't hurting.

[Staximus]

Of course they do, they wrote the legislation

[Mangospacho]

Thats cute - a mere $14.2T in national debt.

[fuddly]

Looks like political games to me

Not being USA what do i know

But seems republicans always use it against democrats

[Anonymous]

Incompetence.