dajafi wrote:It sounds ridiculous to assert that Republicans actively hate poor people and get off on their suffering. But I'm not sure what other conclusion one can draw.

JFLNYC wrote:Without clean air and water money becomes less important and neglecting the environment in the short term leads to both higher cleanup and health costs in the long term. So I disagree with both his premise and yours as being both short-sighted and counterproductive.

SK790 wrote:A question for those of you much smarter than I am with politics and probably in general. Is the 300MM a day loss due the government shutdown that I keep seeing cited at all accurate? How the heck do they compute this?

So far, the group has raised just $6,000 of its $900,000 goal through social media. If the full amount isn't raised over the next few months, donors will get their money back -- although the co-op says it may keep a small percentage for the costs it has already incurred.
...
The monthly fee is 99 cents (unless you make five direct deposits per month), and getting cash from an ATM will cost you $1.95 per transaction. You can add money to the account by using MoneyPak or Swipe Reload at 7-Eleven or CVS, but this will cost $4.95 (charged by the stores). Walmart will let you load cash onto the card for $3.74. Speaking to a live agent is another $2, and writing a check is $2.
...
That's better than the $300 in fees that the average prepaid card comes with, but it's much higher than the amount you would spend using certain prepaid cards from the major banks -- the institutions Occupy Wall Street opposes most. The American Express BlueBird card, for example, costs an average of only $72 per year in fees.

"It's not the worst card out there, but now that we have banks taking advantage of scale and offering such low-cost cards, it's hard to make a case for the Occupy card," said Anisha Sekar, vice president of credit and debit cards at NerdWallet.

JFLNYC wrote:Without clean air and water money becomes less important and neglecting the environment in the short term leads to both higher cleanup and health costs in the long term. So I disagree with both his premise and yours as being both short-sighted and counterproductive.

Werthless wrote:If you start from the premise that everything that the US government does is absolutely essential to prevent death, immorality, and anarchy, then I can understand why you hold the positions you do.

neglecting the environment in the short term leads to both higher cleanup and health costs in the long term.

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:it all comes down to whether Boehner lets them bring it up for a vote

Bucky wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

SK790 wrote:A question for those of you much smarter than I am with politics and probably in general. Is the 300MM a day loss due the government shutdown that I keep seeing cited at all accurate? How the heck do they compute this?

I think it's accurate for how much gets wiped off the board during the shutdown, but much of it will be made up for when the back pay is paid out, which has already passed the House.

threecount wrote:As of midnight tonight, I have been furloughed for a week..today is the fifth work day being missed..

I just want to go back to work..yes, I was pleased to learn that I will still get paid, but that doesn't help me out starting the end of this week, when my next paycheck won't be there, and my bills are due.

I have talked to my congressman, and was pleased to learn that he supports a clean-CR...it's time for the GOP to end this mess and not hold us hostage in what is now clearly a fight about the debt limit, as it's clear it isn't about the health act any longer.