I think there’s a notion out there, expressed on the right, that shutting down a bunch of government functions that they don’t like anyway has benefits in and of itself, and furthermore it saves the government cash in the short run. But that’s actually not true.
“There is absolutely no way this saves money. Zip,” said Bo Cutter, former director of the National Economic Council and a senior fellow at the Roosevelt Institute [...]
First, the government actually has to spend money in order to complete an orderly shutdown.
“When you have to shut something down, that costs money, and ramping something back up costs money,” Jeffrey Zients, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget said Thursday.
Imagine a government construction project. Since it’s impossible to know how long the shutdown will last, workers are forced to wind down all operations and secure the work site. That all costs money.
There are work orders in the thousands of dollars just to put up a little “the government is shut down and so is this website” message on government portals. And that’s merely one kind of ramp-up project. The longer the shutdown, the greater the costs. Who will pay for that? Then there’s all the lost user fees at places like national parks, a loss of millions of dollars in revenue every day. Then there’s the probability that furloughed workers will get back pay for their time off during the shutdown, but then get overtime for plowing through work piled up during the shutdown. It’s a total mess.
And then there are the knock-on costs.
Among the people anxiously waiting to hear if Congress can reach a budget deal are front desk clerks at the Ahwahnee Hotel in Yosemite National Park, manufacturing executives whose companies supply goods to federal agencies, bank loan officers who make mortgages guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration and Wall Street analysts who depend on a steady flow of government data.
The federal government is, after all, a very big business, and temporarily pulling the plug would disrupt many other businesses.
I know private businesses are controlled by Galtian Supermen who don’t need the federal government pushing them on the road to serfdom, but in reality, they require federal spending and contracting to turn a profit. Just taking 800,000 paychecks out of the economy temporarily would have an enormous effect on consumer spending in the near-term, whether or not they all get back pay in the aftermath. The last government shutdown, in winter 1995, knocked a full point off of GDP in that quarter, according to many analysts.
It’s just a terrible, terrible outcome, and you’d think it would be avoided at all costs, especially when the showdown is over lady parts.




53 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
A shutdown would be no more damaging than the farce of a deal which is supposedly in its final stages, cutting a whole $38 billion from the budget.
None of the pols are being serious, none of them, about this problem.
Rafe, the whole “we must fix the deficit” line is nothing more than an excuse to cut social spending, especially that which might benefit nonwhites. That’s how white males, especially rural and exurban ones above the Mason-Dixon line, have been seduced into the GOP. It’s called the “Southern Strategy” and it’s been around for nearly half a century. As Reagan strategist Lee Atwater described it in 1981 (emphases mine):
Is that what this is all about? Huh, I had no idea.
I should have paid more attention to rock-ribbed conservative LBJ:
“I’ll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
Lyndon B. Johnson
“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”
Lyndon B. Johnson
“Government Shutdowns Cost Money”. They don’t care. They spend our money with abandon as long as it’s for war, tax cuts and breaks for the superwealthy/corporations, etc. But when it’s money to be spent for food stamps, health care for the poor, etc., then they suddenly become all tight-waddy. And when it’s money tp be spent for health care for women–why, they’ll shut down the entire country first!
What about the money that will be suddenly snatched from the economy while unemployment is over 8 percent? Have no R’s ever heard of Herbert Hoover?
They have already surpassed 38 and are now working on 78.
The repugs are still holding out for Vagina Vouchers.
Those are great LBJ quotes. His Texas drawl is just dripping from those words.
Duh, ya think?
I’ll reiterate what I posted the other day.
There are more black people in prison in this country, today, than there were slaves in 1850.
Vaginal Visitation Rights?
Tom Tomorrow captures The Repuglican War On Women. Do not miss.
As a former DoD Contracting Officer, I think the shutdown may be viewed as a “constructive change (to all contracts affected)” and the USG may be liable for the lack of “contributions to overhead” and other charges in the case of fixed-price contracts, as well as those mentioned by David. Bring on the litigation!
This bogus drama is brought to your by the KochWhores. Austerity for the lesser people as the corporations engineer more financial arson.Sadly, Obama is a sockpuppet, very similar to another sockpuppet, polluting the local environment.
Obama has Obama Emasculation Syndrome himself. He has been emasculated by the Teabaggers. But Obama will keep reaching out to them, then he reachers out again…and again. He keeps giving up more and more. It is a sad but it is becoming a very predictable spectacle. Obama is a coward as well as a corporatist shill.
Good one! Here’s one:
Vagina Vouchers, your ticket to the clean health train.
The richster terrorists perceive that they are losing their grip on power and need another hostage-taking event to try to get the peons to shut up and submit. Women are just at the top of the peon list.
This wouldn’t be happening if obama and the democrats had come up with a budget when: 1) they were supposed to, and 2) when they had the majority in the house.
Heck, they could even tape one to the toe of that woman in the Viagra tub commerical.
You are so right! Take everything we tax payers pay for to keep this country healthy and give it directly to the corporations with added costs to everyone.
This wouldn’t be happening if the batcrap crayzee tebaggers weren’t trying to defund social programs.
Oh look a new Robert Redford film. A trailer.
78 not 33
The origin of your quote.
We don’t know if the quote is true or not, but I’m pretty sure it originally came from Ronald Kessler’s book “Inside the White House.” Did you pick it up from Newsmax, Melanie Morgan’s blatherings or somewhere else? Links, please. That’s sorta like…the rules around here, homeboy…
That might ruin “the moment”.
Oh, hot damn! Another movie I won’t see.
Kochtroll axiom
The President and Congress do the bidding of campaign contributors, lobbyists, and the powerful in this country. Dealing with the budget when they had a majority would not have allowed for an “excuse” to go along with major cuts to “social” programs. As millionaires and with the power to enact legislation, they certainly don’t worry about social programs in their private lives. As long as citizens continue to believe their only option is to have representatives of one of the two legacy parties, then they also know there is a 50/50 chance they will be re-elected regardless of what they do.
Federal contractors working on projects with interim deadlines — “have stage 1 complete by this date, stage 2 by that date, stage 3 by this other date, and stage four by the end date” — may get stuck if the contracting agency has to certify something but can’t because of the shutdown.
If you’ve got to have a government inspector’s signature before you move on to the next stage of the project, that means your project stops in its tracks along with much of everything in DC.
Boy, ain’t that the truth.
First of all, we shouldn’t even be here because the Dems should’ve finished the budget last year.
What did they think, that the GOP would be more cooperative once they took over the House?
Nah, they were thinking about the filibuster and vote number rule that the GOP placed on the Senate.
Nah, more convenient.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, gas prices are racing to $4/gal for no good reason other than speculation. We are awash in oil reserves and nothing that has occurred in Libya or Japan has changed that.
Anti-social Rethuglicans.
Anti-jobs.
Anti-women.
Anti-children.
Anti-world environment.
Anti….
Antics of taliban toddlers they are.
What happens to brig operations at Quantico during the shutdown?
Over here in California, we’ve been paying north of $4 for awhile, now.
Funny how we never heard a peep about that crap as we conveniently found trillions for war under Bush & Darth.
Here’s an idea…Tax the hell out of speculators and fund Medicare for All.
Nothing.
ah, finally, gitmo WILL get shut down!
Stop being sanctimonious, you effing retard.
On edit – /rahm
No doubt “torturer” is counted as an essential job in case of government shutdown.
Nope.
*heh* That’s Ms. Professional Left to you, sir.
…and tax 3X more to the evil creeps who speculate on food that causes people to starve.
Nothing like slamming the emergency brake when the economy is fighting to get up a Depression Hill.
Makes all the sense in the world, so of course it will never happen.
You do realize the hedge fund boys only pay 15% taxes now, don’t you?
If we just got them back to the regular tax tables everyone else uses, you could put a dent into the national debt!
I’m expecting $5 by June.
/sacramento
“In 1994, people were elected simply to kill the National Endowment for the Arts,” said Rep. Louise Slaughter yesterday. “Now they’re here to kill women.”
http://onespot.wsj.com/politics/2011/04/08/a8318/dem-rep-republicans-want-to-kill-women
batshit crazy teabaggers and many of us here have a common goal, that O’s a 1-termer, just differing views of the appropriate means to that end. they’re willing to burn the entire village down, don’t think we have an effective strategy.
Let’s see… take a program with 6% overhead and no concern for shareholder profit and move millions of people to a program (private insurance) with 30% overhead and shareholders to make happy… Yeah! That’s sure to be the road to reduced medical costs!
The public option was the simple answer to all of this, and Obama should’ve made it non-negotiable.
That’s the Repuglican Way.
In the Deep South a long, long time ago, there were huge brightly-colored grasshoppers. A cousin of mine, a few years older than I, wanted to teach me one day how to take them apart. He started with one leg, pulled it off, then the next, squeezed a wing off, and so on until I ran crying into the house. Repuglicans remind me of that cruel experience.
“Yeah! That’s sure to be the road to reduced medical costs!”
It is when you place it in context. When people run out of money, they don’t have any more medical costs. Solves the social security problem too.
It’s good to be clear about “our” priorities. /s
And they would have gotten a lot farther if they hadn’t listened to the right and insisted instead on raising taxes and increasing necessary expenditures to the poor, out-of-work and miserable everywhere due to the right’s legions of syncophants *and* cut the defense budget by a third to a half by quickly exiting Iraq and Gitmo etc.
Would have gained a lot of respect among the voters too. But this kind of talk is SO 2009…