• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Can we have a government shutdown as well?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Can we have a government shutdown as well?

    More than 800,000 federal employees face unpaid leave with no guarantee of back pay once the deadlock is over.
    BBC News - US begins government shutdown as budget deadline passes

    Wonder what the unions and the ministry-of-getting-very-upset-about-things would make of that...
    "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon Musk

    #2
    Originally posted by Jog On View Post
    BBC News - US begins government shutdown as budget deadline passes

    Wonder what the unions and the ministry-of-getting-very-upset-about-things would make of that...
    Actually I agree, although I think the republicans are abusing the mechanism, I think it's good they have a mechanism to stop spending when debts are growing. Germany has a different mechanism; the constitution allows government to take on debt for emergencies or infrastructural investment where there's a good business plan, and decisions to take on debt can be challenged in the courts. The US approach seems a bit drastic, but I think a strict mechanism to stop the government continually spending more than they have in revenues is good; perhaps a system whereby the first unpaid salaries are those of ministers, then MPs, before hitting public services would be of benefit. Unfortunately I have no reason to trust politicians to do anything within the budget they have, and so if we need to protect ourselves against future debt by treating them like 7 year olds who've blown all their pocket money then so be it.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

    Comment


      #3
      Wasn't it only last year they did this, or something similar, because they'd hit a limit on spending which required both sides to allow to be increased?
      Originally posted by MaryPoppins
      I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
      Originally posted by vetran
      Urine is quite nourishing

      Comment


        #4
        Pattie Brassard did say Obama was going to shut down Congress and go and hide in an underground bunker with his reptilian forefathers.

        Mind you she also said there was going to be a mag 15 earthquake in Seattle in August and on September 26th we were going to be plunged into 3 days of darkness and that our dna was going to change and we were going to become enlightened, so I wouldn't necessarily take all she says on face value.
        Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by d000hg View Post
          Wasn't it only last year they did this, or something similar, because they'd hit a limit on spending which required both sides to allow to be increased?
          I think that was the fiscal cliff thing which is starting to do the rounds again...

          I just can't imagine telling all our non-essential civil service permies to go home without pay - they'd probably riot...
          "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon Musk

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Jog On View Post
            I just can't imagine telling all our non-essential civil service permies to go home without pay - they'd probably riot...
            Nah, too much like hard work.
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #7
              I believe it was Jeremy Clarkson who said parliament should be disbanded and he would run the country, in his cardigan, by "popping in on a tuesday afternoon".
              Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by d000hg View Post
                Wasn't it only last year they did this, or something similar, because they'd hit a limit on spending which required both sides to allow to be increased?
                That was the debt ceiling, which is the one that's up in a couple of weeks. This is the budget.

                It would be good to have some kind of restrictions on future UK governments that they at least have to make the books balance. Perhaps it's another area where the BoE need to get involved to ensure the long term future of the economy isn't sabotaged by politicians looking to buy votes: I.e. the BoE dictates the total budget, and the politicians get to decide where to spend it, rather than the current system where a party with a majority can flip everything up for decades and nobody can stop them.
                Will work inside IR35. Or for food.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Jog On View Post
                  I think that was the fiscal cliff thing which is starting to do the rounds again...

                  I just can't imagine telling all our non-essential civil service permies to go home without pay - they'd probably riot...
                  I can't imagine they'd be able to organise a very effective riot though
                  Doing the needful since 1827

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
                    That was the debt ceiling, which is the one that's up in a couple of weeks. This is the budget.

                    It would be good to have some kind of restrictions on future UK governments that they at least have to make the books balance. Perhaps it's another area where the BoE need to get involved to ensure the long term future of the economy isn't sabotaged by politicians looking to buy votes: I.e. the BoE dictates the total budget, and the politicians get to decide where to spend it, rather than the current system where a party with a majority can flip everything up for decades and nobody can stop them.
                    WHS and when the money's up, it's up. I'd add that the BoE should never hand government more than 95% of the revenues to ensure a reserve is built up, possibly in a Norwegian style sovereign wealth fund. I think the time has come to seperate the budgetters from the spenders.
                    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X