A take on the government shutdown.
Here are some thoughts from an eminent financial adviser, John Dessauer
Fears of a government shutdown are
overblown.
As Washington politicians once again fight over the federal budget
and national debt ceiling, some economists are sounding an alarm, claiming that a federal government shutdown could trim 1.4% off the expected 2.4%fourth quarter growth rate. However, that is not likely to be the case. As one economist said, this is a political and not an economic maelstrom. Between1977 and 1996 there have been 17 government shutdowns. In 1995 the government was shut down for five days. In 1996 as Newt Gingrich and President Bill Clinton continued to battle over the budget, the government was shut down from Dec 16 to January 6. Those back to back government shutdowns trimmed only 0.25% off the U.S. economic growth rate. And, the GDP loss was almost entirely due to federal employees being furloughed.
The idea of a government shutdown might scare investors, but history
says stocks largely ignore the political turbulence. The average decline in the Standard & PoorÂ’s 500 stock index during government shutdowns of ten days or longer is a scant 2.5%. For shutdowns of five days or less the
average decline is 1.4%.
History also tells us that shutting down the government does not stop
the red ink or growth in the national debt. There were three consecutive
government shutdowns during the Carter administration 1977, 1978 and
1979. The national debt continued to grow after each shutdown and has
continued to grow ever since. There has been only one year since 1976 when the national debt declined that was the final year of the Clinton
administration and had nothing to do with a shutdown.
There is another lesson from the history of government shutdowns: In
almost every case both sides lost political capital. Voters from all political
affiliations understand that shutting down the government does nothing to
help the fiscal mess in Washington.
I'm not sure if politics is allowed here but, yep. It's all political theater and in the end nothing will change. It's all about paying off your contributors with other people's money.
I'm wondering what others are thinking about who's winning or losing the battle. I mean, shutting down the WWII memorial with barricades when it's open 24/7 to anyone who walks up to it. And shutting down access to the Colorado river to rafters using government forest rangers? Who thought that was a good idea? They're going out of their way to make the Reps look bad and they're making themselves look petty in the bargain.
Shutting down the memorials, parks etc is the only the general public would know there was a shut down.
10MPlayer wrote:
I'm not sure if politics is allowed here but, yep. It's all political theater and in the end nothing will change. It's all about paying off your contributors with other people's money.
I'm wondering what others are thinking about who's winning or losing the battle. I mean, shutting down the WWII memorial with barricades when it's open 24/7 to anyone who walks up to it. And shutting down access to the Colorado river to rafters using government forest rangers? Who thought that was a good idea? They're going out of their way to make the Reps look bad and they're making themselves look petty in the bargain.
I'm not sure if politics is allowed here but, yep.... (
show quote)
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
What gets me is the report that only "non-essential" government employees and military base personnel are being furloughed. If an employee is "non-essential," then why are we paying his or her salary?
Frank T wrote:
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
Whyn't you go back and re-read the original post and get a clue yourself? Hm. You're reference to bifocal wearers and Social Security checks seems to indicate that older folk have no right to our views? Is that it, laddie? If so, then to borrow a phrase from a famous grumpy old man, why don't you pull your lower lip over the top of your head, and swallow?
JaiGieEse wrote:
What gets me is the report that only "non-essential" government employees and military base personnel are being furloughed. If an employee is "non-essential," then why are we paying his or her salary?
Because of that very question, the PC powers to be changed the expression "essential/non-essential" to furloughed/non-furloughed.
:lol:
JaiGieEse wrote:
Whyn't you go back and re-read the original post and get a clue yourself? Hm. You're reference to bifocal wearers and Social Security checks seems to indicate that older folk have no right to our views? Is that it, laddie? If so, then to borrow a phrase from a famous grumpy old man, why don't you pull your lower lip over the top of your head, and swallow?
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Frank T wrote:
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
tch tch Frank, does it bother you that i get my social security check. lol, to bad. Hey chear up- the post office is also independantly funded, all your bills will come on time!
Frank T wrote:
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
Hey Frank, why not call your senator and recommend that the Interstate system should be shut down, was it not built by the federal government? I guess Obama the petulant has not figured that one out yet.
Lmarc
Loc: Ojojona, Honduras
Frank T wrote:
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
I'd love to see him do that. But Obunghole doesn't have the balls. He'd have to get Michelle to do it for him. :thumbup:
Frank T wrote:
Personally, I think the government shut down should have included Social Security Checks. Then maybe some of you guys that can't see past your bifocals would get a clue.
Where in the hell did you get the idea that Social Security is government funded? That money is MY money and my EMPLOYERS money that was TAKEN from us by the government and given back in piddling amounts. The government has absolutely no dog in that hunt except to charge exorbinant fees for "administrative duties"
Lmarc
Loc: Ojojona, Honduras
THISTLE wrote:
Where in the hell did you get the idea that Social Security is government funded? That money is MY money and my EMPLOYERS money that was TAKEN from us by the government and given back in piddling amounts. The government has absolutely no dog in that hunt except to charge exorbinant fees for "administrative duties"
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.