Quantcast
Opinion

What if the government shuts down and nobody notices?

Comments

Return To Article
  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    What if we go back to 2008 credit and liquidation freeze? Bet you will notice then.

  • Swiss Price, Utah
    Oct. 1, 2013 7:44 p.m.

    No the 800,000 out 3,000,000 won't care; it's a paid vacation that doesn't count against their leave time. All seventeen times this has happened they have been fully paid when it was settled. Even when they were forced home for twenty one days they got full salary for that time.
    The object is to get the media to chronicle how the public is inconvenienced. It has nothing to do with the debt until the US supposedly needs to sell bonds(raise the credit card limit) which Treasury says will happen on 17 October. Convenient timing but not proven to be a set up by the Secretary of the Treasury.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 5:46 p.m.

    They are noticing, especially in the context of the attempt to defund already funded ACA.

  • SG in SLC Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 4:41 p.m.

    Well said, djc.

    I have to shake my head at the naiveté of the folks here who think that shutting down the government is a *good* thing. It costs MONEY to mothball significant portions of the federal government, and then remobilize them again later; in the billions of dollars, I would think.

    Government spending is a component of GDP, so every government dollar that would've been spent but is now sitting idle, thanks to the shutdown, is one less dollar of GDP growth. In real human terms, this is the many contractors and vendors who just had their government contracts and purchases deferred (or canceled). Truly, "money is like manure, of very little use except it be spread." There is also a multiplier-effect to slashing government spending via the shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of government employees just got furloughed, so their discretionary spending likely just took a nosedive (consumer spending is the largest component of GDP).

    Taken together, you begin to see the impact on individuals and the economy that the shutdown will have; and this is small potatoes compared to what will happen if the same kind of shenanigans ensue with the debt ceiling.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 1, 2013 4:34 p.m.

    The kind of juvenile "so what" thinking displayed in this editorial leads to the destructive behavior of our congressional representatives who for years have refused to construct and adopt a budget. Continued irresponsible congressional misbehavior puts our democracy (constitutional compound republic for the radical members of the GOP) at risk.

  • djc Stansbury Park, Ut
    Oct. 1, 2013 4:22 p.m.

    You really don't think you will notice the loss of 40,000 weekly paychecks in Utah. I don't know what planet you are from, but in my world the effects will be felt relatively quickly. My normally bustling building has exactly 4 people working in it right now. Normally there are at least 100. That is 96 people who do not get a paycheck for today. If you don't think that will be felt at the grocery stores, fast food places, and other LOCAL businesses you are sadly misinformed. This shutdown will eventually effect every single resident of Utah and every other state. You talk of uninformed people, but then proceed to make uninformed arguments. One week of this shutdown will have an over $10 million dollar effect on the economy, just from paychecks. This doesn't even count lost tourist dollars. I wish I had my head so far in the sand that I couldn't see what is coming, but sadly I do have the ability to make reasonable rational decisions. It is a sad time.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Oct. 1, 2013 3:50 p.m.

    I wonder what the house would have done had the Senate sent over spending bill, with it a mandate for background checks on every weapon and ammo sell.... I wonder if the house would have considered that bill.... or offered to negotiate over the added on clause.

    I am sure it would get the exact same consideration the House bill got. The last few attempts were... we'll agree to a budget if you cut off your arm.... or wont do that.... ok if you cut off your hand... we;ll pass a CR. The "compromises" were no compromise what so ever. Ok... instead of your wife... I take your daughter.... will that work for you?

    No? Well lets have a conference to agree upon which family member we take....

    Both sides are being silly.... both.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 1, 2013 3:33 p.m.

    Res Novae - Thanks for your comment. It is really unfortunate that so many people buy into a stereotype portrayed by the uninformed folks in media. Thank you for serving the soldiers that put their lives on the line for all of us. Let's hope the Congress can grow up and act their age and get people back to work, serving the American citizens.

  • Cordwainer Bird Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 2:49 p.m.

    We would probably have a more informed electorate if newspaper CEOs recognized the responsibility they shoulder in providing the information. Instead, it's all about "niche news" and getting the most "clicks." Instead of providing unbiased reports and uncovering truths, it's all about turning a buck. The DN is no exception.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 1:56 p.m.

    IF the government shuts down... and the only way most people know is by watching the drama being created for the news cameras... maybe the Tea Party people are right. Maybe our government CAN be smaller.

    Think about it... how would most Americans know the government was shut down today (If it weren't for all the endless news coverage)? They wouldn't. This is a "made for news" event. Without the news reports nobody would even know it was even happening.

  • JerryBall San Francisco, CA
    Oct. 1, 2013 1:25 p.m.

    When it reaches deeper and deeper and all airports shut down because of no traffic controllers, and the troops revolt because they refuse to fight our wars for free and their wives and children are evicted and are hungry because food stamps are very limited now... the beat goes on....?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 12:15 p.m.

    I am betting Barack could disappear and no one would notice. Disappear onto a golf course for three years and the country would be so much the better. This man is a virus.

  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    Oct. 1, 2013 11:32 a.m.

    @ute alumni

    "maybe the govt. working posters ought to think about not working for the government, but then they wouldn't have the cushy cloistered lifetime job they enjoy."

    There's always a response like this whenever a government employee speaks up for his colleagues.

    I work in DOD. My job is hardly "cushy." I work more hours than I am actually paid for on high-visibility programs with all the stresses they entail, and I'm in a constant fight to bring the costs of contractors down on behalf of taxpayers, in an office last renovated in the Ford administration. I took pay cut to be here.

    My job is hardly "cloistered." I daresay warzone deployments get me out and about far more than residents of "Paradise, UT".

    My job is hardly "lifetime." There are plenty of ways to get walked out of the building with your personal belongings.

    Why do I do it? Because I got tired of seeing American kids dying while I was on the sidelines. The uniformed personnel I work with represent the best America has to offer, I love them, I'm proud to serve them, and I believe in the mission.

  • Sabrecat South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 11:28 a.m.

    Youre correct Hutterite. The Market did notice the shutdown. It was up 63 points.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    Oct. 1, 2013 10:28 a.m.

    It's pretty offensive to simply write-off 800,000 people as if they don't matter just because our country is so big. I'll bet if the DNews suddenly lost all of its funding, Mr. Evensen would care a great deal.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Oct. 1, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    The short answer to bus' question about big government is this: We have big agriculture, big labor, big (the biggest anywhere, any time) military and most of all, big business, the goals of which are not necessarily positive to society. Big government helps us avoid being simply plowed under by these huge interest blocks.

    As for the constitutionality of the income tax, I'd say that's pretty solid ground since the Constitution itself was amended to allow it. Wilson felt the money might come in handy for engaging in this little business we now call World War I.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 1, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    Shutdown consequences include:

    Nearly 3,000 aviation safety inspectors are being furloughed by the Federal Aviation Administration as part of the government shutdown, the union representing the inspectors said Monday.

    The inspectors check to make sure airlines are maintaining their planes safely, conduct inspections at airports of planes and pilots, and visit domestic and foreign repair stations where airlines send planes for major overhauls, among other safety jobs, said Kori Blalock Keller, a spokeswoman for the union, Professional Aviation Safety Specialists.

    The Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health were both hit hard by the shutdown in 1995. The NIH stopped taking in new patients and the CDC halted disease surveillance.

    New applications for passports and visas will likely be delayed, possibly affecting the LDS missionary program.

    Processing of new applications for Social Security and Veterans benefits will be delayed.

  • busbus Bethel Park, PA
    Oct. 1, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    Sorry about the word choice. I was wrong. Here is the updatedpoast:

    And to take advantage of cheaper taxes--MUCH cheaper taxes.

    Now, in order to move things back to the United States, companies would have to lose a lot of money--in the form of taxes--so they continue to keep their money off-shore.

    So, you see, taxing a lot works when you own the world but when the world becomes more-or-less even, higher taxes are extremely hurtful.

    We do not need higher taxes, we need to figure out how to get more people working and making or doing things that will allow them to earn higher salaries. Then we can have enough money to do the things we want to do. Of course, if there is close to zero percent unemployment, there will be little need for entitlement spending, so our collective taxes can GO DOWN.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    I almost didn't dare go to work this morning. I got up really early in case the government roads were closed. But everything went fine. No zombies, no armagedon, no traffic snafoos. Just life like any other day.

    If I were a "Non-Essential" government employee I may have been impacted. But just with an extra vacation day to sit home and watch TV. Because in every other government shutdown these non-essential workers were given the day off... but were eventually payed for those days they stayed home.

    I really don't think it's going to be the big deal some in the media have painted it to be.

    On my drive in I heard someone dramatically lamenting that, "We have now shutdown the GREATEST invention of man-kind... the Government". REALLY?

    This is just more political grand-standing.

    They will restart our greatest invention ever... All of our checks from the government will keep comming... and everythign will be fine again. Don't worry. Be happy.

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    maybe the govt. working posters ought to think about not working for the government, but then they wouldn't have the cushy cloistered lifetime job they enjoy. we will suffer without their "services".

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Oct. 1, 2013 7:24 a.m.

    "The economy boomed when Reagan lowered the tax rate" , no it didn't. A recession ensued along with record deficits. Then Volcker squeezed the life out of inflation unleashing nearly a decade of pent up demand and the economy eventually took off. Regan then had to raise taxes 11 times, mostly at Volcker's urging to prevent a deficit that set off inflation again.

    Read history closely and you'll see that Regan did everything possible to destroy the progress Volcker was making against inflation (the problem of the post war economy). Good news Volcker won and Regan lost. Bad news Republicans think Regan did something other than nearly destroy the world economy.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 1, 2013 7:19 a.m.

    How much does DN do to educate and inform its readers?

    Several DN commenters seem unaware of the most basic facts about the ACA--like the fact that Congress and their staff are now required to select their insurance providers from the exchanges.

    I understand controversy sells newspapers, but DN also needs to do its real job to educate and inform, using fact-based truthful information.

  • busbus Bethel Park, PA
    Oct. 1, 2013 7:08 a.m.

    MarkB, you said: "Mr. Rock, we aren't talking about tax rates here. This thread is supposed to be concerned with the shutting down of the federal government, starting tonight. "

    Why do we need SO MUCH Federal Government? It most certainly does relate to tax rates. The problem is not that the Federal Government is partially shutting down, it is all about have too much Federal Government--which feeds off taxes which is directly related to tax rates.

    Remember, this country was going along just fine until Woodrow Wilson decided an INCOME TAX was a good idea and it was, somehow, deemed to be Constitutional.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 6:42 a.m.

    How many millions are out of work and how glibly we are told that "things are getting better" even though we all know it's a lie?

    How little time has been spent discussing ACAS's unintended consequences (we hope they were unintended at least) - of putting people on short time and dissuading small employers from expanding in a time of great recession. But put less than one million federal employees out of work for even a day or two and NOW things are bad!

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 6:05 a.m.

    Our grandchildren deserve a populace that respects laws and rules. What will they shutdown government for to demand their was or economic collapse?

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 1, 2013 4:37 a.m.

    Imagine if every worker in Utah woke up this morning without a job. In fact, the shutdown impacts more than that number. It's not a trivial thing. But then Jay Evanson is safe in his little cloistered environment, isn't he.

  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    Oct. 1, 2013 4:02 a.m.

    Yesterday I issued instructions to suspend work for approximately 1000 government contractors.

    Today I will issue furloughs for 15 'non-excepted' employees after they spend up to 4 hours conducting 'orderly shutdown' procedures. As an 'excepted' employee I will continue to do work for which I have no guarantee of compensation.

    Forgive me, Mr. Evensen, for not seeing this as an abstract exercise, or the latest oddity in Washington partisanship. It also comes on the heels of furloughs and severe cutbacks associated with the sequestration you so casually dismiss.

    Just because it isn't impacting you doesn't mean it isn't impacting anyone.

    I'm past being interested in the blame game. The behavior on the Hill is shameful, and I'm sorely tempted to report the entire Congress to my Inspector General unit for fraud, waste, and abuse.

  • bamball Mesa, AZ
    Oct. 1, 2013 12:49 a.m.

    While I agree with your general sentiment and questioning about life going on untroubled because for one, people are uninformed, but the facts underlining your argument is what is is truly troubling. Life WILL be altered for hundreds of thousands because of this. But then again, for years now, life HAS already altered for thousands as well do to the greedy actions of a Wall Street few, and this past year, sequestration HAS affected many families. Why haven't we talked about that? Most folks lucky to have kept their job this last few years either aren't aware of the struggles of those affected by structural changes in the economy, or could care less because their personal fortunes haven't been affected. Why worry about that 10-15% of those affected, when it's easier to focus on the 85-90% who seem to be okay?

  • Californian#1@94131 San Francisco, CA
    Sept. 30, 2013 11:31 p.m.

    Most of those 800,000 Federal employees are just ordinary working people who have mouths to feed and bills to pay. They would care, their families would care, and the people who need the services they provide would care.

    Now, if Congress and the President were furloughed, who would notice? It isn't as if they are working people who actually serve a useful purpose. I'd trade the whole lot of them for one day of keeping research going at the Centers for Disease Control or one day of keeping Yosemite open.

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 10:34 p.m.

    Wouldn't it be great if we could just get the 49% Who pay nothing to start paying their 40%! Takers vrs Makers! Time for a revolt......

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Sept. 30, 2013 10:33 p.m.

    Mr. Rock, we aren't talking about tax rates here. This thread is supposed to be concerned with the shutting down of the federal government, starting tonight. And, BTW, the Constitution does not contain anything about the nation's economic system. Please concentrate.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 10:32 p.m.

    I haven't noticed yet. Can I stop paying taxes? I bet not. But I bet that even with the government shut down, we are still deficit spending. That is what is really scary.

    I hope the Obamas can't take Air Force 1 for any vacations during the shut down. I hope he had the foresight to go to Washington before midnight. - Questionable.

    For a guy who really wanted to be president, again, he doesn't seem to like being in Washington much.

  • HadleyB st. george, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 10:25 p.m.

    I will notice, and I'm pretty sure the rest of the 800,000 will as well. I have a family to feed and a mortgage to pay. It's all fun and games to those of you who this doesn't impact, but please remember those of us who are not going to get a paycheck if this nonsense continues. And we aren't all corrupt politicians or lazy government paper pushers.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Sept. 30, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    @Freonpsandoz

    We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

    If the income tax were raised to 100%, how much money would the government get?

    Not a stinking red cent. Nobody would work for nothing. As tax rates increase it destroys incentive. If you raise taxes high enough tax revenues actually go down. Raise them to 100% and they go all the way down to zero.

    The economy boomed when Reagan lowered the tax rate. Under Obama the poor are hit the hardest. Black teen unemployment is something like 37%. Poor working people are losing their full time status because of Obama Care (how is that for compassion?).

    If you took everything away produced in manufacturing, mining and agriculture there would be nothing left. All wealth is created in these three industries. Obama thinks you can stimulate the economy with government spending. Government consumes wealth, it does not create it. Obama's plan will make things worse. Much worse.

    If you want prosperity you have to obey the laws of economics. You cannot create prosperity without creating wealth. Strictly follow the constitution and we will get back on course. Our present government will not do that.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:57 p.m.

    @Social Mod Fiscal Con
    The Senate passed a budget earlier this year. The House had refused to go to the conference committee since the two chambers passed different versions.

  • pumpkin Huntington, Utah
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:56 p.m.

    families without a paycheck will notice.

  • Let's Agree to Disagree Spanish Fork, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:34 p.m.

    The fact that many people may notice it has shut down is evidence that the federal government has grown way too big.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:20 p.m.

    Too late. The stock market noticed.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:02 p.m.

    Anarchy for sure! not! is there any way we could make this last for a generation?

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 7:32 p.m.

    Freonpsandoz, Marxist

    According to a recent article by Forbes, the top 400 wealthiest American's have a net worth of just over $2 trillion. So even if you took every single penny they have, and taxed them at 100% after, you still wouldn't touch the debt of the US.

    But please, don't let common sense blind you.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 7:25 p.m.

    The Senate hasn't passed a budget in over 5 years. Nobody seems to be all that worked up over that. In fact, how many people even know? And out of those that know, how many realize how criminally stupid that is?
    Perhaps 5 years from now we'll be talking about how the government has been shut down for 5 years and nobody really cares!

  • David Centerville, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 6:21 p.m.

    Don't worry, the White House and the media are working hard to make sure everyone notices...and blames the Republicans. Even though it is Reid and Obama that have planned this shutdown for weeks now, maybe even months.

  • megaboz Fresno, CA
    Sept. 30, 2013 6:16 p.m.

    Freonpsandoz and marxist, do you also want to go back to the pre-1986 deductibility of personal interest? And eliminate the EIC? And restore other deductions, tax loopholes/shelters/breaks that existed when marginal rates were higher? I've read many claims that few taxpayers ever really paid taxes at those high marginal rates, due to the myriad ways of sheltering income from these rates. And thus those high rates never really harmed the economy (but did cause some capital to be directed towards bad investments)

    Going back to the old system might have great economic benefits. After all, if personal interest on car loans were 100% deductible, people might buy a new car every year or two to take advantage of the tax break.

    Are you really advocating going back to taxing 20% (1960 rate) of the first dollar of taxable income? That would be about $6000 tax on the first $30,000 taxable income in today's dollars?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 5:57 p.m.

    how about if we just shut down the White House...for about 3 years?? BO can spend his time on late night entertainment shows and the golf course. I guess not much would change would it.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 5:29 p.m.

    Freonpsandoz, you are spot on. There would be no debt crisis were the old rates in place. But it is a waste of time mentioning such here, alas.

  • Freonpsandoz Los Angeles, CA
    Sept. 30, 2013 5:15 p.m.

    "we need one [government] that pays its bills and quits running up debt..." I wholeheartedly agree. And the way to do that is to discard Reagan's failed trickle-down economics and go back to the tax structure that we had 50-70 years ago when the US economy was booming and the middle class was healthy and growing. All tax rates were higher then, and the tax rates on the highest earners was upwards of 80%.

  • Spellman789 Syracuse, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 4:59 p.m.

    I bet those 800,000 government workers would care.