Stupidest thing I've read today (Government ineptitude)

[sonrisa]

;)bsp;(ETA: WTF if up with the smiley faces sowing up everywhere today?)

Senator Richard Burr, NC, on the debt ceiling (from a nytimes article www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/politics/many-in-gop-offer-theory-default-wouldnt-be-that-bad.html?hp&_r=0 ):

“We always have enough money to pay our debt service,” said Mr. Burr, who pointed to a stream of tax revenue flowing into the Treasury as he shrugged off fears of a cascading financial crisis. “You’ve had the federal government out of work for close to two weeks; that’s about $24 billion a month. Every month, you have enough saved in salaries alone that you’re covering three-fifths, four-fifths of the total debt service, about $35 billion a month. That’s manageable for some time.”

Did he somehow miss the fact that federal workers will be paid retroactively so that isn't "savings," just deferred costs? Does he assume the debt ceiling negotiations will conclude before the shutdown ends? He is clearly forgetting the revenue that is being lost by the federal government (and won't be reclaimed) during this time while ignoring the costs that are being incurred.

Argles bargles. I'm buying into Paul Krugman's Dunning-Kruger affect argument more and more. ( www.nytimes.com/2013/10/07/opinion/krugman-the-boehner-bunglers.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss ) 

[sergey]

The hell?! Even if the shutdown didn't actually cost money why would you insinuate that not paying federal employees is the way to fill the coffers. Oh that's right, he's getting paid. Makes you wonder how these people function in real life no less run our country.

[sonrisa]

Oct 9, 2013 11:18:05 GMT -5 sergey said:

Even if the shutdown didn't actually cost money why would you insinuate that not paying federal employees is the way to fill the coffers. 

I've seen this argument before, but usually from people unfamiliar with the facts. It's callous but has some traction among those who don't know better.

To make that argument as a member of the very legislature *which will authorize the retroactive payment of federal employees* (because the House has already passed such legislation and the Senate inevitably will because it has broad Senate support even if the timing is in question) is imbecilic. He *knows* better and is pretending he doesn't.

[sergey]

Oct 9, 2013 12:30:59 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

Oct 9, 2013 11:18:05 GMT -5 sergey said:

Even if the shutdown didn't actually cost money why would you insinuate that not paying federal employees is the way to fill the coffers. 

I've seen this argument before, but usually from people unfamiliar with the facts. It's callous but has some traction among those who don't know better.

To make that argument as a member of the very legislature *which will authorize the retroactive payment of federal employees* (because the House has already passed such legislation and the Senate inevitably will because it has broad Senate support) is imbecilic. He *knows* better and is pretending he doesn't.

Exactly. This isn't just someone's dumbass cousin on FB!

[candreco]

And guess who's not paying taxes when they're not being paid? Even if furloughed workers do get paid eventually, the tax revenue from that is delayed as well.