If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Three days until America finally accepts its future destiny as a dystopian hellscape   (foxnews.com) divider line 143
    More: Cool, Boone Pickens, managements, Bob Woodward, David Kerley, crimes against nature, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, R. E. M  
•       •       •

2368 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Feb 2013 at 6:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-26 03:38:42 PM
the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!
 
2013-02-26 03:47:22 PM
At this point, I think a dystopian hellscape would be a HUGE improvement for this country.
 
2013-02-26 03:48:50 PM
My guess is that at about 11:59 pm Thursday night they'll find a way to kick the can down the road 6 months or so and we'll go through all this nonsense again in the summer.
 
2013-02-26 03:52:17 PM

Rev. Skarekroe: My guess is that at about 11:59 pm Thursday night they'll find a way to kick the can down the road 6 months or so and we'll go through all this nonsense again in the summer.


That's not unlikely.
 
2013-02-26 03:52:22 PM
Yes, according to our fearless leaders, we are now teetering on the edge of complete chaos and the end of life as we know it every few months now if we don't do exactly as one of the two parties says.  There will be some last minute deal that delays disaster for another few months and we'll do it all over again.
 
2013-02-26 03:52:47 PM

Rev. Skarekroe: My guess is that at about 11:59 pm Thursday night they'll find a way to kick the can down the road 6 months or so and we'll go through all this nonsense again in the summer.


I think the Republicans are going to be shocked and appalled when the Democrats don't step in to clean up their mess for them.
 
2013-02-26 03:56:21 PM
Future?
 
2013-02-26 04:17:23 PM
We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.
 
2013-02-26 04:26:01 PM
I like how Fox seamlessly switches from denouncing Obama for creating it, never mind John Boehner proposed it, and saying it is incredibly destructive, to blaming the media for hyperbole.

Republicans of course can't understand why the above is wrong.
 
2013-02-26 04:48:27 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Future?


Yeah. As opposed to our PAST destiny.
 
2013-02-26 05:16:10 PM
10 posts in and no one has posted a Majora's Mask screen yet? Fark, I am disappoint.
 
2013-02-26 05:18:47 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Rev. Skarekroe: My guess is that at about 11:59 pm Thursday night they'll find a way to kick the can down the road 6 months or so and we'll go through all this nonsense again in the summer.

I think the Republicans are going to be shocked and appalled when the Democrats don't step in to clean up their mess for them.


See! It is all the Democrats fault!
 
2013-02-26 05:23:51 PM
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-02-26 06:22:39 PM
If not, I bought all these buckets of Apocalypse Chow for NOTHING
 
2013-02-26 06:30:11 PM
i.imgur.com
 I knew this was coming. They were warning us.
 
2013-02-26 06:30:21 PM

Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


10-4.  I've got Portishead on standby.
 
2013-02-26 06:33:07 PM
I was told on Facebook the spending cuts are miniscule and we should stop listening to the cry wolf media.
 
2013-02-26 06:34:49 PM

Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!


We only have about a dozen extra ones in service... which is about a dozen more super carriers than anyone else has.

/Each single one of which carries more aircraft and has more combat power than the militaries of 95% of the world........
 
2013-02-26 06:37:48 PM
Who actually takes republicans at their word these days?
 
2013-02-26 06:38:16 PM
I'm going to go against what seems to be the consensus here and predict that the sequester will, in fact, kick in.  There will be cuts and there will be layoffs.  Now, I don't think they will leave it at that forever; I think they'll probably get something done in maybe a couple of weeks or months.  But my expectation is that Friday will arrive and there will not be a deal.
 
2013-02-26 06:38:56 PM

vernonFL: [images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 478x253]



 But I will rule Bartertown
 
2013-02-26 06:39:25 PM
Another article counting Medicare and social security (which aren't getting cut) as part of the federal budget to make the cuts to discretionary spending seem much smaller than they will be.
 
2013-02-26 06:42:02 PM

WTFDYW: We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.


Yeah we were really spending too much on curing Alzheimer's and cancer and diabetes. Those automatic cuts to NIH and NSF funding were surely just the thing we needed to end the wanton spending. While we're at it, let's get a bunch of people laid off and thus spending less money into the economy; that's exactly what we need coming out of the recession.
 
2013-02-26 06:44:29 PM

WTFDYW: We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.


As a country, "we" have been forced to feed hundreds of billions of dollars into the gaping maw of the super-rich while cutting social services to the bone and beyond.  Spending isn't the problem.

Douche.
 
2013-02-26 06:46:33 PM
I love how its "Obama's" fault the legislature can't do it's job according to yellow journalism.

Republicanism: is there no end to your blatant retardation? No? Didn't think so.

Hint: the president can't pass legislation. Civics class, I guess there were budget cuts at your elementary schools and you didn't learn about the governmental branches.
 
2013-02-26 06:49:08 PM

StrikitRich: vernonFL: [images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 478x253]


 But I will rule Bartertown


It better go through. If I show up at work in march with my S&M fetish gear on and there isn't a hell scape I am going to look mighty odd.
 
2013-02-26 06:51:28 PM

neongoats: I love how its "Obama's" fault the legislature can't do it's job according to yellow journalism.


I heard John Boner on the radio arguing that Obama should go try and get a budget passed with the Dems in the senate... because you know... the senate can originate spending bills...


I believe that's in article farking one....
 
2013-02-26 06:52:36 PM
I love how every republican is saying that Obama is completely responsible for the sequester, even though the republicans voted for it after Boehner gave his infamous PowerPoint presentation extolling its virtues. Not to mention Paul Ryan has spent years in the House repeatedly demanding a sequester tied to exceeding a spending cap be put into place.

Because it's totally relevant, here's a re-link to So what did Paul Ryan think about the sequester before he started blaming it on Obama? Go on, guess
 
2013-02-26 06:53:26 PM

GAT_00: I like how Fox seamlessly switches from denouncing Obama for creating it, never mind John Boehner proposed it, and saying it is incredibly destructive, to blaming the media for hyperbole.

Republicans of course can't understand why the above is wrong.


Yeah, I came here to point this out...
 
2013-02-26 06:53:51 PM

insano: WTFDYW: We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.

Yeah we were really spending too much on curing Alzheimer's and cancer and diabetes. Those automatic cuts to NIH and NSF funding were surely just the thing we needed to end the wanton spending. While we're at it, let's get a bunch of people laid off and thus spending less money into the economy; that's exactly what we need coming out of the recession.


Yeah, any budget cuts will come from releasing the most dangerous criminals and letting children starve.  Surely, there is no alternative.
 
2013-02-26 06:55:27 PM
Remembers Kids, when you are using a pump action shotgun you cannot short-shuck it!
 
2013-02-26 06:55:57 PM
Can I crack open my neighbors skull and feast on the goo inside yet?
 
2013-02-26 06:57:53 PM
From a Pew poll released today:

Sixty-two percent of adults say the GOP is out of touch with the American people, 56 percent say it's not open to change and 52 percent say it's too extreme, according to a Pew Research Center poll released Tuesday.

Forty-six percent of adults say the Democratic Party is out of touch with the American people, 38 percent of people say it's not open to change and 39 percent say it's too extreme.

Dear gop,
You're going to lose this sequestration fight too. Look for these numbers to soon be the good old days. You farks.

Sincerely,
The Majority
 
2013-02-26 06:58:44 PM
Meh. I have way more ammo than any of my neighbors.
 
2013-02-26 07:00:51 PM

Communist_Manifesto: Can I crack open my neighbors skull and feast on the goo inside yet?


Saturday.
 
2013-02-26 07:01:03 PM

Evil High Priest: Dear gop,
You're going to lose this sequestration fight too. Look for these numbers to soon be the good old days. You farks.


It's not a question of winning the battle though. Half of the GOP Congressmen want the sequester to go through. If they vote for anything Obama proposes, they will be crucified at home. If they vote against it, even if it means the sequester goes into effect, it means they get to keep their jobs no matter how much they just screwed over the country.

I fully expect the can to be kicked further down the road rather than an actual solution.
 
2013-02-26 07:03:49 PM
Listen Libtardos, take the Binky out of your mouths & put the Kool-Aid down.
Domestic flights are down 27 percent from pre-9/11 levels and the budget at the FAA is up 41 percent, That's all you need to know about any of this, the scary sequestration hype is uncalled for.


/sarcasm
 
2013-02-26 07:04:37 PM
If only there was some sort of easy off ramp available.
 
2013-02-26 07:04:38 PM
Dystopian hellscape?
I call dibs on the fertile, attractive women.
 
2013-02-26 07:06:33 PM
So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.
 
2013-02-26 07:06:39 PM
The teabaggers and their ilk are finally getting the deep spending cuts they've been demanding for years. And they could not be more pissed off and frightened, so now it's "The Obama Sequester." That devilishly handsome Randian tax-cutting, fiscally responsible shooter of skeet! How dare he!?!?

/War is peace. Freedom is slavery. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
 
2013-02-26 07:08:00 PM

Doktor_Zhivago: neongoats: I love how its "Obama's" fault the legislature can't do it's job according to yellow journalism.

I heard John Boner on the radio arguing that Obama should go try and get a budget passed with the Dems in the senate... because you know... the senate can originate spending bills...


I believe that's in article farking one....


Yeah. Boner. He is nearly as retarded and out of touch as RMoney.
 
2013-02-26 07:08:03 PM

Kumana Wanalaia: Who actually takes republicans at their word these days?


About 47% of the country.  Those are the people who voted for Mitt Romney.
 
2013-02-26 07:08:24 PM
...because even though both total federal outlays and per capita federal outlays have actually decreased under Obama, it's now that there is an emergency of critical proportions...

http://mercatus.org/publication/government-spending-recap
 
2013-02-26 07:08:50 PM

eraser8: Kumana Wanalaia: Who actually takes republicans at their word these days?

About 47% of the country.  Those are the people who voted for Mitt Romney.


That was an hilarious coincidence.
 
2013-02-26 07:09:48 PM
www.gorbould.com

Embargo on!
 
2013-02-26 07:10:15 PM

NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.


I have a friend who works for NOAA.  She and the entire rest of the staff are being furloughed 22 days next year.  The sequester is really effecting her and her family, as she is sole income for the household.  Although it's probably incredibly tiresome, you can tell your tea party family member that they're wrong.  Again.
 
2013-02-26 07:13:19 PM

sabreWulf07: NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.

I have a friend who works for NOAA.  She and the entire rest of the staff are being furloughed 22 days next year.  The sequester is really effecting her and her family, as she is sole income for the household.  Although it's probably incredibly tiresome, you can tell your tea party family member that they're wrong.  Again.


I have, repeatedly. It just doesn't register. I've explained how it's impossible for it not to effect research institutions immediately as well as a ton of federal and contractor employees.
 
2013-02-26 07:14:11 PM
I, for one, welcome our Chinese and Indian overlords.

Though I am concerned, China-and-world-economy-wise, about what's going to happen regarding China's ghost city spending.
 
2013-02-26 07:15:16 PM

Supes: Evil High Priest: Dear gop,
You're going to lose this sequestration fight too. Look for these numbers to soon be the good old days. You farks.

It's not a question of winning the battle though. Half of the GOP Congressmen want the sequester to go through. If they vote for anything Obama proposes, they will be crucified at home. If they vote against it, even if it means the sequester goes into effect, it means they get to keep their jobs no matter how much they just screwed over the country.

I fully expect the can to be kicked further down the road rather than an actual solution.


Someone pointed out in another thread how the cuts are going to hit the red states much harder than the blue. So we have that going for us.

/which is nice
 
2013-02-26 07:15:18 PM
So it's #scarequester again?  I thought we had all decided on #obamaquester.  I can't keep track.
 
2013-02-26 07:17:35 PM
I'm too busy being amused at Fox accusing the "mainstream" media of hysteria and hyperbole.

Because Fox is such a bastion of rational discourse and objective analysis.
 
2013-02-26 07:18:27 PM

Lord Jubjub: insano: WTFDYW: We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.

Yeah we were really spending too much on curing Alzheimer's and cancer and diabetes. Those automatic cuts to NIH and NSF funding were surely just the thing we needed to end the wanton spending. While we're at it, let's get a bunch of people laid off and thus spending less money into the economy; that's exactly what we need coming out of the recession.

Yeah, any budget cuts will come from releasing the most dangerous criminals and letting children starve.  Surely, there is no alternative.


Um, I'm not exaggerating. Research money will be cut, people will lose their jobs, and, no, no alternatives have been put forth by congress which include targeted rather than across-the-board cuts.
 
2013-02-26 07:20:01 PM
Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.
 
2013-02-26 07:20:09 PM
I'd just like to point out that I generally don't listen to someone who apparently hasn't left the 80's:

R.E.M. sang, "It's the end of the world as we know it."

like Mr. T had taken over headline writing.

Who knows, tomorrow's headline may lament "dogs and cats living together."

find a way to cut in a Ginsu factory.
 
2013-02-26 07:22:25 PM

Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!


I guess we need some protection from an angel to keep us safe from harm.
 
2013-02-26 07:23:37 PM

exick: 10 posts in and no one has posted a Majora's Mask screen yet? Fark, I am disappoint.


img1.etsystatic.com
 
2013-02-26 07:28:10 PM
d1ovi2g6vebctw.cloudfront.net
 
2013-02-26 07:28:15 PM
The issue isn't the amount of the cuts, it's their targets. These cuts were designed to hurt as an impetus for action. They are meant to be awful for the country, though some of the language used in the news is hyperbolic. We could probably cut the same amount more reasonably without causing huge problems, but in this case the cuts are coming in areas where they are intended to cause problems. It's just a shame Congress underestimated their own obstinance.
 
2013-02-26 07:30:01 PM

Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!


And THAT is along the same lines of what I got from a John McCain soundbite, as though the Republicans were crying about spending cuts, the very thing they've wanted.  It made my head hurt!
 
2013-02-26 07:30:08 PM
www.badmovies.org
 
2013-02-26 07:30:30 PM

Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.


You really don't know much about budgets, do you?

The spending cuts are to:

1) discretionary spending

and

2) apply only to the remainder of the budget year.

To put that into perspective, current discretionary spending is at an historic low as a percentage of GDP.  So, are current taxes.  If we went back to the tax rates of the 1990s, we'd be out of this mess.  Instantly.
 
2013-02-26 07:31:10 PM
Just watched Speaker Boehner on CBS Evening News.

Here is what he asserts:
1. Immigration Depratment releasing detainees because of budget shortfalls is fault of Obama's Justice Department and  Obama's Federal INS-controlled facilities. Whar more money to feed, guard and house illegals? Obama just doing this to scare true Americans®

2. Fartbongo got all his tax increases in January when Bush Tax Cuts were allowed to expire. So still government does not have revenue problem... government has spending problem.

3. Obama's sequester can only be fixed by Democrats in the Senate. Boehner claims that they have TWICE proven that everything will be alright if we just gut MEDICARE, marginalize and destroy  Social Security by turning it into a 'means-tested' welfare system, fark the poors and close down EVERY single Federal Government agency that doesn't directly benefit the industrial military complex, the oil companies and the corporate agriculture monopoly.

Sadly missing from the above was any realistic or useful ideas or hint of compromise. Not a peep about ending tax breaks, cutting subsidies to oil and exploration companies, corn production, ethanol and corporate industrial farms.  Nor was he addressing lucrative government, military and 'defense' contracts.

By all means, cut waste, reel in unchecked spending, penalize fraud, and rethink and retool social, education, healthcare and prison systems. But only the the people that lost the 2012 presidential elections and lost House seats are still thinking what they've been doing for the past 35-40 years is a good idea. You lost the 2012 elections because more people are getting wise to the game.You will be better served if you stop trying to play the victim in the blame game. You will be better served if you stop believing that every person who is non-white and not a Republican is either, 'illegal',lazy,  taking drugs and/or on welfare. You will finally get it through your thick heads that teachers, doctors, police and firemen are just as valuable as soldiers and civilian DOD employees.
 
2013-02-26 07:31:39 PM

smitty04: [d1ovi2g6vebctw.cloudfront.net image 300x229]


timethemoment.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-26 07:35:09 PM

smitty04: [d1ovi2g6vebctw.cloudfront.net image 300x229]


Wrong.

The president's plan was something much more sensible: he proposed a system that would cut spending AND raise taxes if the Congress couldn't get its act together.  The Republicans rejected the offer.

It was the Republicans, not the president, who insisted that the sequester consist entirely of tax cuts.

Keep in mind that I think the president's plan, even though it was much more sensible than the Republican idea, was stupid policy.  The best solution was to 1) return tax rates to those of the 1990s and 2) impose a surtax to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
 
2013-02-26 07:35:27 PM

eraser8: Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.

You really don't know much about budgets, do you?

The spending cuts are to:

1) discretionary spending

and

2) apply only to the remainder of the budget year.

To put that into perspective, current discretionary spending is at an historic low as a percentage of GDP.  So, are current taxes.  If we went back to the tax rates of the 1990s, we'd be out of this mess.  Instantly.


and go back to the tax rates of 1960 and I bet the majority of americans would get a nice annual check from uncle sam as that trickle-down from the job creators finally, uh, trickled down.

trickled trickles, don rickles
 
2013-02-26 07:35:48 PM

NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.


Also, as someone who finishes my active duty military service this summer, it is making job hunting very difficult.  Both private contractor and federal jobs in my field have dried up on account of the budget issues.
 
2013-02-26 07:36:36 PM
Dear Republicans,

Do you goddamn job.

Love and kisses,

Every sane person in the United States
 
2013-02-26 07:37:11 PM
It's dystopian to cut defense spending?

Which party refused to nation credit card bill?
 
2013-02-26 07:38:16 PM

Omahawg: eraser8: Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.

You really don't know much about budgets, do you?

The spending cuts are to:

1) discretionary spending

and

2) apply only to the remainder of the budget year.

To put that into perspective, current discretionary spending is at an historic low as a percentage of GDP.  So, are current taxes.  If we went back to the tax rates of the 1990s, we'd be out of this mess.  Instantly.

and go back to the tax rates of 1960 and I bet the majority of americans would get a nice annual check from uncle sam as that trickle-down from the job creators finally, uh, trickled down.

trickled trickles, don rickles


More like pissing on them
 
2013-02-26 07:41:28 PM

Omahawg: and go back to the tax rates of 1960 and I bet the majority of americans would get a nice annual check from uncle sam as that trickle-down from the job creators finally, uh, trickled down.


True.  But, we'd have to bear the gnashing of teeth about how the 1950s and early 1960s -- which the teabaggers ordinarily cite as the country's golden age -- were actually a period of overt socialism...even apart from the marginal tax rates of the time.  I mean, during that time, airlines couldn't change their prices without government approval.  And, private citizens couldn't own the telephones in their houses (they belonged to AT&T).

One almost gets the impression that what the teabaggers miss most about the 1950s and early 1960s was the fact that black folk knew their place...and, weren't uppity enough to win the presidency.
 
2013-02-26 07:43:18 PM
z.about.com
 
2013-02-26 07:43:32 PM
Well, at least about 600k poor women and children won't get to eat for 6 months, so that's good.
 
2013-02-26 07:44:26 PM
www.dbcovers.com
 
2013-02-26 07:45:34 PM
I just hope our richest comrades won't be hurt too much in all this. They've had such a hard time lately.
 
2013-02-26 07:45:41 PM

The WindowLicker: NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.

Also, as someone who finishes my active duty military service this summer, it is making job hunting very difficult.  Both private contractor and federal jobs in my field have dried up on account of the budget issues.


So go find something other than defense contracting and federal jobs.  You are welcome.
 
2013-02-26 07:47:16 PM

smitty04: [d1ovi2g6vebctw.cloudfront.net image 300x229]


What kind of fools would pass a bill with sequestration in it?

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-26 07:47:57 PM

eraser8: Omahawg: and go back to the tax rates of 1960 and I bet the majority of americans would get a nice annual check from uncle sam as that trickle-down from the job creators finally, uh, trickled down.

True.  But, we'd have to bear the gnashing of teeth about how the 1950s and early 1960s -- which the teabaggers ordinarily cite as the country's golden age -- were actually a period of overt socialism...even apart from the marginal tax rates of the time.  I mean, during that time, airlines couldn't change their prices without government approval.  And, private citizens couldn't own the telephones in their houses (they belonged to AT&T).

One almost gets the impression that what the teabaggers miss most about the 1950s and early 1960s was the fact that black folk knew their place...and, weren't uppity enough to win the presidency.


Oh Yeah!  Bring on the racism!  Hey don't forget about pretty being able to beat up homosexuals and wives at will.  Got to bring in the violence!
 
2013-02-26 07:50:00 PM

Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!


You should really get this person a copy of Civ 2, 3, 4, or 5, or maybe an old copy of Rise of Nations.  Maybe they can get a better understanding of how much naval power it would take to effectively invade the USA.  Unless they think Canada is coming for us, or Mexico, in which case one supercarrier group sitting on the dock at the beginning of a land invasion wouldn't matter.  Even with no opposing navy, it still takes a huge amount of naval transport capacity to supply and replace lost people/equipment, which is sure to happen when they near landfall and try to set up operations.  We're not exactly small on the land/air forces that would swarm them as soon as they got within range of the coast.

/Yes, those games are simplified in terms of actual warfare
//Sounds like this "friend" needs something to dumb it down a bit
 
2013-02-26 07:50:37 PM

The WindowLicker: NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring.  That's good to know.

Also, as someone who finishes my active duty military service this summer, it is making job hunting very difficult.  Both private contractor and federal jobs in my field have dried up on account of the budget issues.


As a relatively recent physics PhD, I'm going through the same thing. If the 'solution' of this sequester is another three or six month stopgap, I'm going to be farking pissed. As long as this kind of thing is just over the horizon, hiring will be anemic at best.
 
2013-02-26 07:50:40 PM
media.cagle.com
 
2013-02-26 07:50:49 PM

smitty04: [z.about.com image 500x334]


While the Republicans want to pass the debt on to our children's, children's, children's, children's, children.
 
2013-02-26 07:51:25 PM

smitty04: [z.about.com image 500x334]


So is this YoMammaObamas alt or Canis Noirs?
 
2013-02-26 07:51:42 PM
I say, bring it on.  Elections have consequences, and that doesn't just apply to presidential elections -it applies to Congressional elections, too.  It's about time Americans get what's coming to them for continuing to give the GOP so much power in our public policy.
 
2013-02-26 07:52:55 PM

Don't Troll Me Bro!: Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!

You should really get this person a copy of Civ 2, 3, 4, or 5, or maybe an old copy of Rise of Nations.  Maybe they can get a better understanding of how much naval power it would take to effectively invade the USA.  Unless they think Canada is coming for us, or Mexico, in which case one supercarrier group sitting on the dock at the beginning of a land invasion wouldn't matter.  Even with no opposing navy, it still takes a huge amount of naval transport capacity to supply and replace lost people/equipment, which is sure to happen when they near landfall and try to set up operations.  We're not exactly small on the land/air forces that would swarm them as soon as they got within range of the coast.

/Yes, those games are simplified in terms of actual warfare
//Sounds like this "friend" needs something to dumb it down a bit


To be fair, the cartels have more firepower than the Mexican army. Hell, they are part of the Mexican Army.
 
2013-02-26 07:54:29 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: I think the Republicans are going to be shocked and appalled when the Democrats don't step in to clean up their mess for them.


That's because the House Democrats have nothing to gain. The GOP is basically down to staffers and family members for support. I think the Senate Republicans will go on largely unscathed because they have been working with the other side . It's the House that keeps farking shiat up. I laughed at Boner telling the Senate to get off it's ass and do something today.He has no clue how Congress works and is completely delusional.
 
2013-02-26 07:55:13 PM

eraser8: Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.

You really don't know much about budgets, do you?

The spending cuts are to:

1) discretionary spending

and

2) apply only to the remainder of the budget year.

To put that into perspective, current discretionary spending is at an historic low as a percentage of GDP.  So, are current taxes.  If we went back to the tax rates of the 1990s, we'd be out of this mess.  Instantly.


Don't talk down to me as if you think you are smart. First of all, the cuts come to both discretionary and Military spending. Second, only 3 months of the year will have passed....not like these cuts are comming in the last month. By the way, it is 44 billion out of 3600-ish billion.

As for going back to the 90's tax rates...I would absolutely gleefully go back to those tax rates if you would also agree for us to go back to those spending rates as well. You see, going back to those tax rates would not BAM instantly fix the budget. It wouldn't even close our deficit. We put 40% of every dollar we spend on the national credit card, and if we can't even cut 1.2%, we have no hope for a future.

Oh, and by the way, those tax increases will have to hit every single person. There isn't enough rich people in the US for us to suck dry to save us. We absolutely have a spending problem. It is immoral to continute to pretend we will have enough children to pick up our tab.
 
2013-02-26 07:58:08 PM

sabreWulf07: NeoCortex42: So from my tea party family member, it seems the current talking point is that the sequestor won't really affect anybody. Nobody is getting laid off and places will still be hiring. That's good to know.

I have a friend who works for NOAA. She and the entire rest of the staff are being furloughed 22 days next year. The sequester is really effecting her and her family, as she is sole income for the household. Although it's probably incredibly tiresome, you can tell your tea party family member that they're wrong. Again.


I work for a government agency. We have a big facility-wide meeting with someone from up-on-high on Thursday. I can't wait to see how much they're f*cking us.
 
2013-02-26 07:58:47 PM

Mrtraveler01: smitty04: [z.about.com image 500x334]

While the Republicans want to pass the debt on to our children's, children's, children's, children's, children.


I'm pretty sure the Republicans actually want to pass the debt onto the poor.

How else can you explain the effort to eliminate corporate and income taxes and replace the revenue with increased sales taxes?
 
2013-02-26 07:59:10 PM

czetie: I'm too busy being amused at Fox accusing the "mainstream" media of hysteria and hyperbole.

Because Fox is such a bastion of rational discourse and objective analysis.


I wonder if they waited a full 10 minutes before declaring themselves "America's Most Popular News Channel" and detailing how many millions of viewers they have.
 
2013-02-26 07:59:32 PM
img.photobucket.com

My god.  They weren't kidding.
 
2013-02-26 08:01:45 PM
FTA: "R.E.M. sang, "It's the end of the world as we know it." If ever there were a theme song for the liberal media's coverage of the sequester the band's iconic song would be it."


I knew Fux News doesn't have any taste, but come on man, "Bad Day" would have been so much better.
 
2013-02-26 08:02:20 PM

Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.


Right now we're not spending enough.
 
2013-02-26 08:03:44 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.

Right now we're not spending enough.


LOL.  That is some mighty fine thinking right there.  You's deep man, DEEP!
 
2013-02-26 08:05:44 PM

Tannax: Don't talk down to me as if you think you are smart. First of all, the cuts come to both discretionary and Military spending.


Um, military spending is a kind of discretionary spending.  I don't want to talk down to you...but, do you know what the phrase "discretionary spending" means?  You don't seem to.

Tannax: I would absolutely gleefully go back to those tax rates if you would also agree for us to go back to those spending rates as well.


Per capita?  ABSO-FARKING-LUTELY.  Not in absolute terms, of course...because that would be a reduction in real spending.

Tannax: Oh, and by the way, those tax increases will have to hit every single person. There isn't enough rich people in the US for us to suck dry to save us.


Under the current president, the deficit has shrunk by a serious amount.  We could balance the budget if we returned to pre-Bush taxation levels...and, if we eliminated loopholes introduced by the Republican Congress (1995-) that sought to shield lots of income from taxation.

Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.


Our spending as a percentage of GDP is at an historical LOW for the modern era.  You might not have been aware of it; but, it's the truth.
 
2013-02-26 08:07:38 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.

Right now we're not spending enough.


True.  But Republicans are committed to austerity and trickle-down...you know, the plans that have never worked for anyone anywhere at any time?  Yeah, that's how "conservatives" roll.
 
2013-02-26 08:08:15 PM
The sequester is a one-day weight loss program: chop off a couple fingers, maybe a toe. No more than 2% of your body weight. (so, ok, the whole hand) No big deal, right? And clearly the most intelligent way to go about losing some weight.

Stupid, short sighted and violent. No wonder the R(ape) party likes it.
 
2013-02-26 08:09:54 PM

GAT_00: I like how Fox seamlessly switches from denouncing Obama for creating it, never mind John Boehner proposed it, and saying it is incredibly destructive, to blaming the media for hyperbole.

Republicans of course can't understand why the above is wrong.


Not only that, Fox is mainstream media, too.
 
2013-02-26 08:10:15 PM

Lionel Mandrake: But Republicans are committed to austerity and trickle-down...you know, the plans that have never worked for anyone anywhere at any time?


If you ignore math, reality, and history -- especially very recent history, then austerity is definitely the solution to our fiscal problems.
 
2013-02-26 08:10:30 PM

Communist_Manifesto: Can I crack open my neighbors skull and feast on the goo inside yet?


Brains the feast of the dystopian generation.

/unless there are zombies. Then all bets are off.
 
2013-02-26 08:11:58 PM
The sequester is no big deal and it's all Obama's fault anyway.

/this is what infromed Fox News viewers actually believe
 
2013-02-26 08:12:16 PM

WTFDYW: We will move on without missing hardly a beat. As a country, we need a "hair cut". We've been spending like there's no tomorrow at least since I graduated high school in 1981.


Using a chainsaw to lop off the top of the skulls of everyone on Social Security isn't a "haircut".
 
2013-02-26 08:22:22 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.

Right now we're not spending enough.


Troll or simpleton?  Please be troll.  I get tempted to debate simpletons.
 
2013-02-26 08:25:27 PM

Ambivalence: Rev. Skarekroe: My guess is that at about 11:59 pm Thursday night they'll find a way to kick the can down the road 6 months or so and we'll go through all this nonsense again in the summer.

That's not unlikely.


I agree. Its improbable that the stated scenario will definitely not occur.
 
2013-02-26 08:29:28 PM
If Mitt Romney was President, the sequester would have never happened.
 
2013-02-26 08:30:59 PM
1933:  "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

2013:  "FEAR!  FEAR!  FEAR!!!"
 
2013-02-26 08:31:24 PM

cchris_39: Troll or simpleton?  Please be troll.  I get tempted to debate simpletons.


This was worth your time to post.
 
2013-02-26 08:35:34 PM

cchris_39: Dusk-You-n-Me: Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.

Right now we're not spending enough.

Troll or simpleton?  Please be troll.  I get tempted to debate simpletons.


Yeah, you're right and (nearly) every economist is wrong.
 
2013-02-26 08:44:59 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-26 08:47:54 PM

Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.


Seriously, are you this stupid?

I'm going to make it really, really simple for your dumb ass. Let's say my household budget is $100K a year. I decide to cut $2,300.  That's 2.3%   How hard could it be?

But I'm not going to cut it from rent, utilities, gas, entertainment, clothing.  I'm only going to cut it from my grocery budget, which is $10K a year.

Gee, how could that little 2.3% be difficult?

See, we're cutting $85 billion from a portion of the budget that is about $2 trillion.  AND half the fiscal year has already gone by.

Is this so hard to grasp?  Medicare - off the table.  Social security - off the table. Military salaries off the table. Contractual obligations like leases. Etc.

Farkity fark fark fark some people insist on being stupid.
 
2013-02-26 08:50:31 PM

Funk Brothers: If Mitt Romney was President, the sequester would have never happened.


Yes we all get that that's the point the GOP is trying to get across. We're being punished for being uppity and voting for the black kid with the single mom.
 
2013-02-26 09:01:58 PM

jasimo: cchris_39: Dusk-You-n-Me: Tannax: We absolutely have a spending problem.

Right now we're not spending enough.

Troll or simpleton?  Please be troll.  I get tempted to debate simpletons.

Yeah, you're right and (nearly) every economist is wrong.


He probably thinks that giving tax breaks to rich people creates jobs.
 
2013-02-26 09:05:09 PM

MisterRonbo: Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.

Seriously, are you this stupid?

I'm going to make it really, really simple for your dumb ass. Let's say my household budget is $100K a year. I decide to cut $2,300.  That's 2.3%   How hard could it be?

But I'm not going to cut it from rent, utilities, gas, entertainment, clothing.  I'm only going to cut it from my grocery budget, which is $10K a year.

Gee, how could that little 2.3% be difficult?

See, we're cutting $85 billion from a portion of the budget that is about $2 trillion.  AND half the fiscal year has already gone by.

Is this so hard to grasp?  Medicare - off the table.  Social security - off the table. Military salaries off the table. Contractual obligations like leases. Etc.

Farkity fark fark fark some people insist on being stupid.


----

Not only that, but we're not actually cutting anything.  The government is required to do everything it does by law.  Congress says "you will do this and you get this much money to do it."  The sequester isn't shutting down any programs.  Doing that takes time and planning.  We're not canceling contracts immediately.  We're not consolidating offices.  Agencies can't just unilaterally decide to cut the fat.  That fat is usually specifically earmarked into bills.

So, the only real option to cut costs is to have everyone stop coming in one day a week, but to otherwise keep doing the exact same thing.  Just, you know, with a 20% pay cut that surely wont hurt the economy much or cause any sort of retention issues.

To use a stupid household analogy, this is like deciding that you're not making enough money to cover your expenses and deciding to deal with it by not eating on Tuesdays and by flipping your circuit breaker for the house off on Saturdays.
 
2013-02-26 09:10:04 PM
I don't care whose fault it is (well, okay, maybe a little but I just assume that most of the politicians are ineffective in one way or another), or what could have been done to prevent this shiatshow.

Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?

I assume the country wont collapse, but just how bad will it be? What will these impacts look like?

Please, someone just cut to the chase without all of the politicking for once.
 
2013-02-26 09:10:27 PM
Tannax

Don't talk down to me as if you think you are smart

You could help by not saying such stupid things.

only 3 months of the year will have passed

Like this, for example. The fiscal year starts October 1st. Five months. Can you count that high?

it is 44 billion out of 3600-ish billion.

or this, for example. It's $85 billion, and it is not out of the whole 3.5 trillion. 60% of the budget is off the table, and 40% of the year has already passed. That leaves less than a third of the budget. This has been explained to you, but you're, well, stupid.

Oh, and by the way, those tax increases will have to hit every single person. There isn't enough rich people in the US for us to suck dry to save us.

More stupid. Here's how stupid happens: start with an actual fact: if we taxed EARNED income of the wealthy at 100% it wouldn't cover the debt. Now simplify it in to "if we taxed rich people 100%" and you're in the land of stupid.

Capital gains (unearned income) is $2 trillion. Over 90% of it flows to the top 2% of earners. You damn well could solve the deficit problem taxing that at even 50%.

You could also start taxing wealth as opposed to income. Sheldon Adelson has $8 billion or so? Take 2% a year.

You could also put in a corporate minimum tax. The portion of the tax burden carried by corporations has declined by more than half in the last 50 years.

Hint: the top 2% have 80% of the wealth. The richest 400 people in America have more wealth than the poorest 50% of the country. The Wal Mart heirs and Warren Buffet and Bill Gates and Sheldon Adelson and GE - that's where you get the money from.

But you'll keep spouting the same utter bullshiat, because no doubt you've read these facts before and reject them.
 
2013-02-26 09:15:19 PM

Tannax: Seriously, how farking hard can a 1.2% cut to the budget hurt? It's a goddamn rounding error compared to the money we are spending out of our children's piggy bank.


As one of those children, I read this as "Waaah, we don't want to pay back those loans we've been taking out for the past thirty years against our children's credit by raising taxes."
 
2013-02-26 09:20:17 PM

Springy23: Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?


Read this

Of course, it's not like it all happens at once on the first day, but the longer it goes on, the worse it will get.
 
2013-02-26 09:27:25 PM

Springy23: I assume the country wont collapse, but just how bad will it be? What will these impacts look like?

Please, someone just cut to the chase without all of the politicking for once.


Also,

Link
 
2013-02-26 09:28:20 PM
I though the GOP was for budget cuts, why are that getting all freaked out about this sequester, seems like they are getting what they wanted.
 
2013-02-26 09:37:32 PM
Y2K!11
 
2013-02-26 09:42:32 PM

clowncar on fire: Y2K!11


So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
 
2013-02-26 09:47:14 PM
Sales tax on shares of stock.

How many shares changed hands today?
 
2013-02-26 09:50:37 PM

Springy23: Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?


Part of the difficulty of this is that *everything* is getting cut.

Take a look at this.
http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/books/apub/deathtaxes/D_T _A _Plus_1_LARGE.jpg

All of those things are getting cut.  People are listing things like grants, subsidies to kids, subsidies to states, ect because those are easy to quantize - this many people usually get money, now only this many will.  But that's not really the whole effect.

Who knows what effect it'll have on the administration of aging.  I don't even know what they do but I suppose they'll be doing less of it now.  There might not be any noticable effect on you personally.

However, the overall effect is that a whole bunch of people will be either out of a job or will have their incomes drastically cut fairly suddenly.  It'll suck for the people involved and in the aggregate it'll drag on the economy and slow our recovery, slow our job growth, and possibly push us back into recession.
 
2013-02-26 10:05:26 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Springy23: Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?

Read this

Of course, it's not like it all happens at once on the first day, but the longer it goes on, the worse it will get.


You are presuming that they don't alter the wasteful spending habits that necessitated the sequestration in the first place. Most economies, when faced with a reduction of funds, tend to reign in on the practices which tend to waste assets in an effort to meet the new budgets and provide consistant services.  Reducing redundancy, inefficiency, surplus purchasing, waste, are some of the more obvious ways of meeting a budget without effecting service.  Others introduce recycling (recovering funds), conservation of resources, best practices, etc.

I took a look at the estimate of damage for Kentucky.  They like to shock you by saying "3000 kids will go without" which may be true but only if they continue doing business in the future the same inefficient way as they are currently handling it.  Using a few tweeks to how business is run, they could easily be saying " only 1000 kids will be effected by cuts in service".  One of the advantages of sequestration would be that services would be forced to reevaluate how they do business in order to succeed.  Don't be put off by the size of the cuts- take the time to see exactly what percentage of the overall budget they are currently working under.  In many cases, the sacrifice won't be as great as they make it out to be.

I'm not naive in believing that their won't be some pain initially as government is a notoriously costly and poorly run business, but with time, services should be able to adapt to the budget cuts and be able to continue providing pretty much the same level of service to their customer in the future they are currently providing today.
 
2013-02-26 10:13:08 PM

bluorangefyre: Circusdog320: the article failed to mention conservatives going off full tilt about a couple of parked aircraft carriers...My nutty republican "friend" said we should prepare for massive attack!


WOLVERINES!

And THAT is along the same lines of what I got from a John McCain soundbite, as though the Republicans were crying about spending cuts, the very thing they've wanted.  It made my head hurt!


I used to think the conservatives didn't believe in Keynesian economics.
 
2013-02-26 10:21:19 PM

NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.

How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".
 
2013-02-26 10:35:03 PM

clowncar on fire: NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".


Umm, companies didn't waste millions.  Companies spent millions making sure their software was up to date and wouldn't crash.  Had they not done that all those things that were predicted would have happened.

There was a very specific issue - software that only used 2 digit years (quite a lot) would roll over and think it was 1900.  Companies had to either update their software to use 4 digit years, update their software to continue using 2 digit years but assume some range other than 1900-2000 (1970-2070 or whatever), or to ensure that there were no comparisons or subtractions that would cause problems.  e.g., your company's payroll software calculates ((clockout - clockin)*your hourly rate) - but since you clocked out in 1900 you just worked negative 100 years, you now are automatically billed $5M instead of paid for your 2 hours of work over the new year.
 
2013-02-26 10:57:03 PM

Springy23: I don't care whose fault it is (well, okay, maybe a little but I just assume that most of the politicians are ineffective in one way or another), or what could have been done to prevent this shiatshow.

Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?

I assume the country wont collapse, but just how bad will it be? What will these impacts look like?

Please, someone just cut to the chase without all of the politicking for once.


The White House already did that for us. Enjoy!!!
 
2013-02-26 11:19:48 PM

clowncar on fire: NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".


Wow, what a terrible analogy! Something happened a while ago that didn't turn out to be as bad as predicted, so this new thing, which is completely different in every way, will also not turn out as bad as predicted.
 
2013-02-27 12:39:52 AM
When government is framed as a business with customers it's only a matter of time before it becomes a kleptocracy.

We're f*cking citizens, I wish we'd stop with this bullshiat that we're nothing but consumers whose purpose is to either make someone money or cost someone money.
 
2013-02-27 01:12:08 AM
The republicans would rather drive us into a recession than raise taxes on the wealthy a few percentage points. And when that self-inflicted recession inevitably happens, they will easily convince their retarded, knuckle-dragging, newly-unemployed supporters that the "liberalist president evarrrrr" WANTED massive budget cuts. And they will continue to get away with it until the either South secedes, or their misinformed, sellout boomer supporters f*cking die.
 
2013-02-27 01:14:15 AM

Karac: Dystopian hellscape?
I call dibs on the fertile, attractive women.


I'll take the infertile ones. I'm finished with diapers.
 
HBK
2013-02-27 02:18:06 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Springy23: Will someone please explain, in unbiased terms, what will happen come Saturday if a resolution is not met? No sarcasm about dystopia or BS about nothing changing. Which entitlements disappear and how will it affect the average American worker/student/business owner/family/erotic dancer, etc.?

Read this

Of course, it's not like it all happens at once on the first day, but the longer it goes on, the worse it will get.


If anything good can be said about the sequester, it's this: at least the TSA will get less money.
 
2013-02-27 05:35:38 AM

seanpg71: clowncar on fire: NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".

Umm, companies didn't waste millions.  Companies spent millions making sure their software was up to date and wouldn't crash.  Had they not done that all those things that were predicted would have happened.

There was a very specific issue - software that only used 2 digit years (quite a lot) would roll over and think it was 1900.  Companies had to either update their software to use 4 digit years, update their software to continue using 2 digit years but assume some range other than 1900-2000 (1970-2070 or whatever), or to ensure that there were no comparisons or subtractions that would cause problems.  e.g., your company's payroll software calculates ((clockout - clockin)*your hourly rate) - but since you clocked out in 1900 you just worked negative 100 years, you now are automatically billed $5M instead of paid for your 2 hours of work over the new year.


The y2k bug also lined a lot of programmer pockets. I wouldn't be surprised if the amount spent to fix the two digit issue had an impact on the size of the (then impending) dot com boom
 
2013-02-27 06:52:04 AM

seanpg71: clowncar on fire: NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".

Umm, companies didn't waste millions.  Companies spent millions making sure their software was up to date and wouldn't crash.  Had they not done that all those things that were predicted would have happened.

There was a very specific issue - software that only used 2 digit years (quite a lot) would roll over and think it was 1900.  Companies had to either update their software to use 4 digit years, update their software to continue using 2 digit years but assume some range other than 1900-2000 (1970-2070 or whatever), or to ensure that there were no comparisons or subtractions that would cause problems.  e.g., your company's payroll software calculates ((clockout - clockin)*your hourly rate) - but since you clocked out in 1900 you just worked negative 100 years, you now are automatically billed $5M instead of paid for your 2 hours of work over the new year.


This. I personally wrote code in the 1980s that was still running in embedded control systems in exhibition centers, hospitals, and offices in 2000 and that would have failed in bizarre ways unless somebody fixed it. (Among other things, it calculated how long certain systems had been running without being recycled or restarted -- and for a week in 2000 it would have decided that the answer was "99 years give or take" and systems would have been constantly recycling).

On top of that, I was product manager of a very popular 4GL/GUI tool in the run up to Y2K. One of the features of the product was automatic date windowing. If we hadn't fixed our runtime (to change the assumed 2 digit window), literally tens of thousands of applications built on our product would have had bizarre and unpredictable behavior. We diverted a lot of development and even more testing resources to fixing those problems and ensuring they didn't create regressions (and on the plus side of the ledger, saved all the users of our product from having to fix their applications individually).

So really, those of you that get your "knowledge" of Y2K from Time magazine and Big Bang Theory need to STFU. Maybe it's not as glamorous as Bruce Willis blowing up an asteroid, but those of us that were actually there know that a huge problem was averted because a lot of people put in a lot of hours making sure it didn't happen. You're welcome.
 
2013-02-27 06:55:46 AM

thisone: The y2k bug also lined a lot of programmer pockets. I wouldn't be surprised if the amount spent to fix the two digit issue had an impact on the size of the (then impending) dot com boom


If by "impact" you mean "dragged down the amount of useful work being done because people were busy remediating old problems just to maintain parity", then I suppose yes, it's possible it did drag down the size of the dot com boom.

But thinking that Y2K spending actually inflated spending in any useful way is a perfect example of the Broken Windows Fallacy.
 
2013-02-27 07:13:18 AM

czetie: thisone: The y2k bug also lined a lot of programmer pockets. I wouldn't be surprised if the amount spent to fix the two digit issue had an impact on the size of the (then impending) dot com boom

If by "impact" you mean "dragged down the amount of useful work being done because people were busy remediating old problems just to maintain parity", then I suppose yes, it's possible it did drag down the size of the dot com boom.

But thinking that Y2K spending actually inflated spending in any useful way is a perfect example of the Broken Windows Fallacy.


Neither in fact.

Perfect example of reading what you want to see.
 
2013-02-27 08:06:32 AM

Super Chronic: I'm going to go against what seems to be the consensus here and predict that the sequester will, in fact, kick in.  There will be cuts and there will be layoffs.  Now, I don't think they will leave it at that forever; I think they'll probably get something done in maybe a couple of weeks or months.  But my expectation is that Friday will arrive and there will not be a deal.


I'm hoping that's what will happen. It might actually get people's attention focused on what the GOP has brought about. No one ever pays attention to the weatherman until the tornado hits.
 
2013-02-27 08:48:01 AM
Dystopian Hellscape?You mean like Detroit?
 
2013-02-27 09:11:13 AM

thisone: czetie: thisone: The y2k bug also lined a lot of programmer pockets. I wouldn't be surprised if the amount spent to fix the two digit issue had an impact on the size of the (then impending) dot com boom

If by "impact" you mean "dragged down the amount of useful work being done because people were busy remediating old problems just to maintain parity", then I suppose yes, it's possible it did drag down the size of the dot com boom.

But thinking that Y2K spending actually inflated spending in any useful way is a perfect example of the Broken Windows Fallacy.

Neither in fact.

Perfect example of reading what you want to see.


OK, you could mean one of two things "by impact on the size of the ... dot com boom":

1) It decreased the size of the dot com boom, perhaps by diverting money and programmers to remediation of old problems instead of creating new code. If that's what you mean, congratulations. You might well have a point.

2) It increased the size of the dot com boom, perhaps by pumping more money into tech work. If that's what you mean, congratulations. You have committed the Broken Windows Fallacy.

If it's neither of those, then I have no idea what your assertion is, and all I can say is... proceed, guv'nor.
 
2013-02-27 05:28:48 PM

czetie: seanpg71: clowncar on fire: NeoCortex42: clowncar on fire: Y2K!11

So the government should just max out all their credit cards. When the computers go down, they don't have to pay them off.
How quickly we forget.  Remember all the nay-sayers predicting the collapse of the economy as all the computers of the world collapsed after partying like it was 1999?  Companies wasted millions in y2k pre-testing computer systems and updating software in an effort to prevent that crash.  People pulled cash from the banks and sold off stock and come December 31st at midnight, we all stayed in our homes with one eye on the computer, waiting for any sign of that predicted crash.

By quarter past there was this huge collective groan as we realized that, not only had the crash of polite socite occurred, but that we had been ripped off millions protecting ourselves against the fears of the nay-sayers.

Now we face sequestration.  Again we only have the cries of the nay-sayers ringing in our ears as they take up cadence whispering a line from their most favorite but feared childhood fable, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling...".

Umm, companies didn't waste millions.  Companies spent millions making sure their software was up to date and wouldn't crash.  Had they not done that all those things that were predicted would have happened.

There was a very specific issue - software that only used 2 digit years (quite a lot) would roll over and think it was 1900.  Companies had to either update their software to use 4 digit years, update their software to continue using 2 digit years but assume some range other than 1900-2000 (1970-2070 or whatever), or to ensure that there were no comparisons or subtractions that would cause problems.  e.g., your company's payroll software calculates ((clockout - clockin)*your hourly rate) - but since you clocked out in 1900 you just worked negative 100 years, you now are automatically billed $5M instead of paid for your 2 hours of work over the new year.

This. I personally wrote code in the 1980s that was still running in embedded control systems in exhibition centers, hospitals, and offices in 2000 and that would have failed in bizarre ways unless somebody fixed it. (Among other things, it calculated how long certain systems had been running without being recycled or restarted -- and for a week in 2000 it would have decided that the answer was "99 years give or take" and systems would have been constantly recycling).

On top of that, I was product manager of a very popular 4GL/GUI tool in the run up to Y2K. One of the features of the product was automatic date windowing. If we hadn't fixed our runtime (to change the assumed 2 digit window), literally tens of thousands of applications built on our product would have had bizarre and unpredictable behavior. We diverted a lot of development and even more testing resources to fixing those problems and ensuring they didn't create regressions (and on the plus side of the ledger, saved all the users of our product from having to fix their applications individually).

So really, those of you that get your "knowledge" of Y2K from Time magazine and Big Bang Theory need to STFU. Maybe it's not as glamorous as Bruce Willis blowing up an asteroid, but those of us that were actually there know that a huge problem was averted because a lot of people put in a lot of hours making sure it didn't happen. You're welcome.


Thank you.
 
2013-02-27 05:41:18 PM

nmemkha: Dystopian Hellscape?You mean like Detroit?


Fascinating things happening in detroit after the economic collapse: http://www.changinggears.info/2011/11/09/empty-places-its-not-squattin g-its-blotting/

http://detroitagriculture.net/

Urban farms popping up all over, abandoned blocks becoming eco-villages, just really interesting stuff...
 
2013-03-01 02:55:15 AM
National map from Buzzpheed indicating states facing the worst cuts

/did not wish to gank Buzzy's bandwidth
//map is almost funny
 
Displayed 143 of 143 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report