Thread on Government Shutdown: THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS OFFICIALLY REOPENED!

[TNC]

There are around 44 million black people in the US currently. Black industries could thrive if we kept to our own but obviously it wouldn't match the number that white people could put up.

We'd get pushed out of markets and bought out, no way we can compete without crossover

 

[IGSaint12]

We'd get pushed out of markets and bought out, no way we can compete without crossover

Well I'd assume in such a scenario that white business couldn't buy black businesses and vice versa, if were talking about a segregation model.

 

[Aprogressivone]

Republicans do an excellent job of redirecting the focus to issues that the common poor white person can get behind (so called family values, anti-minority rhetoric, etc.) that they never have to actually fully explain how their other economic and social stances would effect their constituents.

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” John Steinback

"If you can convince the lowest white man that he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket." Lyndon B Johnson

Some of my favorite quotes when I think of poor white people on political and social issues.

 

[Kritic]

I disagree with that. White people are a large majority in our country. There are SEVERAL industries that can not only survive, but thrive catering purely to white folk. Adversely, no minority owned industry could stand on its own catering only to a certain minority group and have any sort of national impact.

Like I said, Libertarianism works in a perfect world, but when there are entire towns/cities (widespread throughout the country) that purely white, there is no way a minority couldn't get screwed in those circumstances.

 

[PimpHandStrong]

What bottom line, airlines are notoriously unprofitable

Doesn't discount my statement either way. It still holds true.

 

[acri1]

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/01/2707751/how-the-world-sees-the-government-shutdown/

India: The Indian press had strong feelings about the shutdown. “World holds breath as US government shutdown imminent,” The Times of India reported. Its business paper, The Economic Times, took a different tack: “US faces shutdown, ‘fiscal cliff’: It’s advantage India?” But don’t forget the home front: “Forget US shutdown, India might be on the verge of a shutdown,” fretted Shishir Asthana in the Business Standard. Indian business executives also told the Voice of America they could not understand how a developed country like the U.S. could shut down its government because of a legislative impasse.

China: China’s state-run Xinhua news agency warned tourists heading to America that popular destinations, such as national parks and monuments in Washington, D.C., might be closed. The Voice of America, noting that “the news of the shutdown was covered extensively by domestic media throughout Asia on Tuesday,” collated Chinese reactions that ranged from worried to almost comically optimistic. VoA interviewed Professor Chen Qi at the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy in Beijing, who “opined that if this had happened in another country, it might be more problematic, but he trusts that the maturity of the U.S. government and American politicians will ‘have the wisdom to come to a consensus and solve this issue smoothly,’ especially since they have been down this road numerous times previously.”

The United Kingdom: The British press, known for its arch reactions to crises, didn’t disappoint. “America shuts down,” blared The Daily Mail, Britain’s most notorious tabloid. “David Cameron warns on world growth as US government shuts down,” The Independent reported. “It is a risk to the world economy if the US can’t properly sort out its spending plans,” Cameron told BBC Radio 4 on Tuesday.

But perhaps the harshest coverage came from the stolid BBC. In a piece titled “US shutdown has other nations confused and concerned,” Anthony Zurcher wrote, “For most of the world, a government shutdown is very bad news – the result of revolution, invasion or disaster. Even in the middle of its ongoing civil war, the Syrian government has continued to pay its bills and workers’ wages. That leaders of one of the most powerful nations on earth willingly provoked a crisis that suspends public services and decreases economic growth is astonishing to many…Now, as the latest shutdown crisis plays out, policymakers in other nations are left to ponder the worldwide impact of the impasse.”

Russia: The state-run media, naturally, had a field day. The Moscow Times, an independent paper, summarized the reaction: “The budgetary battle made headlines in Russian media on Monday. “The ‘Elephants’ Are Robbing the U.S. Government,” read a headline in the government-run Rossiiskaya Gazeta, referring to the symbol for the Republican Party. The state television broadcaster Vesti cautioned, “The U.S. government may be left penniless on Tuesday.” The Times itself worried about the effect of “federal government without money” on “the issuance of U.S. visas to Russians or support to cosmonauts on the International Space Station.

Germany: The German press erupted in criticism for American politicians on Tuesday. Der Spiegel Online proclaimed, “A superpower has paralyzed itself,” while The Welt predicted “fatal consequences” that could damage the U.S. recovery. The Zeit newspaper blamed a “handful of radicals,” stating, “A small group of uncompromising Republican ideologues in the House of Representatives are principally responsive for this disaster. They are not only taking their own party to the brink, but the whole country. Unfortunately the leadership of this party has neither had the courage nor the backbone to put them in their place.”

France: France’s Le Monde called the shutdown “grotesque” and noted that American cemeteries in France will be closed. On the editorial page, Le Monde dramatically lamented, “Jefferson, wake up, they’ve gone crazy!”

Italy: Italy, mired in its own financial and political crisis, warned against the U.S. shutdown’s serious economic consequences. The newspaper Corriere della Sera called the shutdown a huge blow to U.S. and global economic recovery, noting that sequestration has already done significant damage to Washington in particular.

South Korea: Seoul paper Chosun Ilbo ran a story assuring Koreans that the U.S. will not reduce its military presence in South Korea despite budgetary upheaval at home. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who is on a four day trip to South Korea, acknowledged that the Pentagon was under pressure to cut spending, but would maintain the 28,500 troops in South Korea regardless.

American exceptionalism indeed.

 

[TNC]

Well I'd assume in such a scenario that white business couldn't buy black businesses and vice versa, if were talking about a segregation model.

That's not how Capitalism works, we'd get mashed on brehbreh

 

[Skooby]

I'm wonder if I'm one of the DoD employees that's going back to work. Haven't gotten a call yet.

 

[DEAD7]

American exceptionalism indeed.

Worry bout what other nations think brehs.

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

Worry bout what other nations think brehs.

live in a political vacuum when we are the reserve currency of the world brehs

 

[DEAD7]

live in a political vacuum when we are the reserve currency of the world brehs

That makes their news paper 'opinions' of our politics matter?

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

That makes their news paper 'opinions' of our politics matter?

It influences how the world perceives us, and indirectly impacts the confidence in american markets and financial institutions, IMO

 

[DEAD7]

It influences how the world perceives us, and indirectly impacts the confidence in american markets and financial institutions, IMO

TBH much of the world perceives us negatively anyways, and act solely upon necessity when dealing with us. We shouldn't worry at all about their perceptions.

 

[TNC]

"]

[/quote]

Do you disagree?

 

[Rawtid]

I work for the government. As far as I know is, the republicans are against the ACA because of its spending. What I want to know is, what does "fairness in Obamacare" means in which the speaker keeps referring too. It all seems fair to me, people get their fair medical insurance. I just wanted to know the issues involving it.

Apparently the businesess where given an extension to 2014 on when they would have to implement the ACA in their companies while individuals were still required to sign up for health insurance or face fines by November of this year (not 100% sure). So the Republicans are saying they will pass the CR, if individuals are given an extension as well. I think they had some other demands but that's the one I know for sure they are trying to fight. None of their constituents want to be fined for not having healthcare.