Today's Poll: Do you support a federal government shutdown?
Seriously? Over 200 people support a shutdown? OVER A WALL?!? A wall that will do almost NOTHING?!?
As well-known p***y-grabbing con-man might say... "Sad... so sad"
Tim, some people think a wall will do something even though it will do nothing. I don't see the point in shutting down the government other than to have a counterproductive tantrum.
... Go ahead shut it down .....remember when they shut down the last time? they were saying the military was not going to get paid? they lied. Then when it was all said and done, every employee who missed work was paid in full. It's The Holiday Season, shut it down, employees get a free vacation with compensation... shut it down shut it down... ho ho ho .... ..... ho ho ho
Walls don't work? OF COURSE, they're not 100% effective. Nothing but death is 100% effective.
But, "walls" have been used for centuries as a deterrent.
Cities use(d) them as deterrents - See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_with_defensive_walls
Countries have used them as "deterrents".
The great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall come to mind. Exactly how many people successfully traversed the Berlin Wall, as opposed to how many could have (if the wall wasn't there)?
According to the article at https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/24/border-walls-berlin...
"At the end of World War II, there were seven border walls or fences in the world. By the time the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 15".
"Today, as President Trump pushes his campaign promise to build a wall on the border with Mexico, there are at least 77 walls or fences around the world — many erected after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City and at the Pentagon."
The U.S. military has used walls for centuries, to repel/slow down/deter invaders.
Pretty much ALL U.S. prisons are surrounded by walls. Trust me, they're fairly effective. Are they 100% effective? No. Again, only death is 100% effective.
But, walls DO WORK. To say they don't is utter nonsense.
David - your "employees get a free vacation with compensation" is a bit myopic, and does not include all the facts:
- Furloughed employees (those sent home and not considered "essential") are NOT guaranteed to be paid for the time off. The pattern HAS been for Congress to approve payment for those employees, though - the Senate has already passed a bill that would pay the furloughed employees of this shutdown;
- What about contract employees? Their employers are under no obligation to make the missed time up to them. A buddy of mine is an employee of a company that contracts with the EPA.. he's salaried so he will be paid, but he said hourly employees of his company may get screwed by the shutdown;
- Regardless of whether a government employee is "essential" or furloughed, they will not get paid during the shutdown. What if snowflake Trump has a major hissy-fit and keeps his shutdown going for 3 or 4 weeks? No pay during that time. Try to tell your mortgage holder or credit card company that you can't pay them, or try to buy groceries without having been paid.
Tim, what took you so long? you like to argue I see you on almost every post. I stand by my post even if it doesn't have all your facts. You mention a 3 or 4 week period without pay, want me to feel sorry? What's your point? If a person doesn't have enough savings to pay next months mortgage/rent , they have no one to blame but themselves, certainly not the President and his government shut down. There is subsidized housing available in Batavia but I'd imagine the "facts" you were referring to earn too much income to qualify.. if offended, shut it down . if offended, tear it down.
Well, David... as fun as debating with you can be, I had other things to do in my life. When I read that article I decided it was a good addition to the discussion, and posted it.
And Howard, thanks for yet another useful link. I had an illegal living in the development where I used to live. She could never go home as she came to the US on a 2-year work visa, and has overstayed her visa by a good decade or so. So when her parents want to have a visit with her, they have to travel from Canada as she would never make it back into the US if she went home.
"If a person doesn't have enough savings to pay next months mortgage/rent ... "
That's a rather myopic view.
More than 70 percent of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
There are reasons for this -- some is poor financial planning by individuals; some are changes in economic well being driven by government policy.
While much of the cost of living over the past 50 years has decreased, a key area increase is housing. Housing costs over the past several decades have increased faster than inflation. This is caused by restrictive zoning, prohibitions on development in some areas (a big problem in California), low-interest rates, the mortgage interest deduction. All market-distorting practices.
Also, the increase in healthcare insurance costs has kept income down for many Americans, with employers diverting more of what might have gone into raises into health care and other benefits, some of them now mandated by government regulations.
Yes, Americans take on too much debt, which is also another major factor in living paycheck-to-paycheck. That's a personal choice but it's also a choice not available 60 years ago, made worse by usury-level interest rates, and increasingly necessary as housing and healthcare costs rise.
So, yes, we could all manage our finances better, it's not a straight-line, "blame the worker" calculation.
Every wall that has been erected to isolate a region has failed. You can investigate Hadrian's Wall, the Great Wall of China, the Maginot Line, the Berlin Wall... History should demonstrate the foolishness (if not utter hypocrisy) of building walls, but the folks who think a wall is the best solution aren't much interested in pragmaticism.
RE #6... That buddy of mine who is salaried, and who I thought would be paid by his company even though 100% of his work is contract work for the EPA? Yeah - he's got the option of taking an unpaid furlough starting with the new year, or using vacation. Seems like his company with 45,000 employees, only a small percentage do gov't contract work, won't be paying that small percentage when the government money runs out.
I know some might consider this rude, but Trump sucks as a President. He really does.
I think the same about you!!!!! I bet he would box your ears in, and then laugh like hell when you try to debate Ms. Bower!! GET A LIFE Remember her CHALLAGE to debate you anytime,, anywhere???
Thank you, Thomas, for that well thought out response. It says quite a lot about you.