What do you think are the benefits of a government shutdown / debt ceiling not being raised?

[RPforPrez.]

From lurking over the past few weeks, I know theres been tidbits and such forth mentioned here and there, though it seems much of the focus is still on Obamacare.

The mainstream media is all reporting how the government's shutdown will affect your every day life, and what not, and continuously talking about how it can harm you.

But how do you think it could help you, or at least, the nation?
Just interested in everyone's perspectives

Sorry if I missed a thread regarding this

 

[DamianTV]

There is no benefit. Its a method called Govern by Crisis.

They get what they want by creating a Problem in order to achieve their goals.

They create a Problem, to which, only they have a Solution.
The people have a Reaction to the Problem and demand they impose their Solution.
The Solution is imposed, even though the burden of the Solution is carrid by those who stand to lose the most, yet is supported by those who can least afford it.

Its a dog and pony show. If we want a Real Solution, lets think seriously about getting rid of Central Banks, Fractional Reserve Lending, and Fiat Currencies. It is these things that have created the Problem - Reaction - Solution paradigm.

 

[69360]

It's not possible to get rid of Obamacare with getting the presidency and senate. A shutdown on that will get the GOP blamed and do real damage.

The debt ceiling fight is worth fighting. People have had enough and support is there. I don't a shutdown on that issue will be nearly as damaging to the GOP.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

There is no benefit. Its a method called Govern by Crisis.

They get what they want by creating a Problem in order to achieve their goals.

They create a Problem, to which, only they have a Solution.
The people have a Reaction to the Problem and demand they impose their Solution.
The Solution is imposed, even though the burden of the Solution is carrid by those who stand to lose the most, yet is supported by those who can least afford it.

Its a dog and pony show. If we want a Real Solution, lets think seriously about getting rid of Central Banks, Fractional Reserve Lending, and Fiat Currencies. It is these things that have created the Problem - Reaction - Solution paradigm.

Well, that would be fixing a problem created by the real problem. If we really want to fix the underlying problems in this country, we need to:

GET A SQUADRON OF B-52's AND CARPET BOMB "K" STREET TILL NOTHING IS LEFT BUT RUBBLE!

It's not possible to get rid of Obamacare with getting the presidency and senate. A shutdown on that will get the GOP blamed and do real damage.

The debt ceiling fight is worth fighting. People have had enough and support is there. I don't a shutdown on that issue will be nearly as damaging to the GOP.

It would depend on who's left standing in the game of musical chairs. If the house holds firm and puts back in the defunding, it goes back to Reid. If he refuses to consider the bill, he's "it". The House approved a budget. If it passes the Senate and Obama veto's it, he's the one shutting down the government.

-t

 

[jj-]

If the House passes a bill defunding Obamacare and doesn't cave, a shutdown will be worth it because Obama won't tolerate having the government closed for 2 years, so at some point he will cave, and Obamacare won't get funded.

If not raising the debt ceiling leads to default, that will be positive because the government would no longer be able to borrow money which it uses to grow the government.

 

[TheGrinch]

Libertarians getting blamed and looking like we're butthurt as they would make the temporary shutdown look as bad as possible. Sounds like a winning strategy.

I'm not even going to read or post in what I'm sure is a train-wreck of a thread regarding Rand being torn on this. Torn is an optimistic view. IMO, it would be tearing off your nose to spit on your face. It's not a victory, it's a way for them to take heat off themselves and transfer it to the small-government advocates, like what they did with the sequesters, but to the extreme.

You all want REAL change? And you think this is that? This would be nothing but horribly misguided politics to go through with it. Look at the big picture, not just with our "Fuck big government" lenses. You know the statists are looking at the big picture and salivating at them making a move like this..

You don't have to abandon principle to realize what are good and bad strategies to achieve those means. This would be a bad one.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

 

[69360]

It would depend on who's left standing in the game of musical chairs. If the house holds firm and puts back in the defunding, it goes back to Reid. If he refuses to consider the bill, he's "it". The House approved a budget. If it passes the Senate and Obama veto's it, he's the one shutting down the government.

-t

It won't pass the senate, so Obama will never see it. The GOP will be blamed. I don't think this one is worth it right now.

Refusing to raise the debt ceiling will get far more public support. Obama's only arguments for raising it so far are "every other president got it raised" and "we have to pay our bills". That just isn't going to fly anymore. The public has had it with borrowing to pay for things.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

It won't pass the senate, so Obama will never see it. The GOP will be blamed. I don't think this one is worth it right now.

Refusing to raise the debt ceiling will get far more public support. Obama's only arguments for raising it so far are "every other president got it raised" and "we have to pay our bills". That just isn't going to fly anymore. The public has had it with borrowing to pay for things.

Once O'Care has it's roots spread throughout the system, it will require digging up the all of the leach lines and replacing them to get rid of it. And there are miles and miles of leach lines in this country, and that ain't going to happen until it's all abandoned.

So, it depends. Do you want to save what's left and repair it, or just start over?

 

[fisharmor]

Bear with me.

Four years ago the DC area got buried under three feet of snow. Readers in Michigan or Utah are thinking "so what?" but believe me, that is a big freaking deal in DC. I've been around here since 1986 and I can count on one hand the number of times there's been more than a foot. One foot paralyzes the area. Two feet, and people start repenting their sins. Three feet meant absolutely nothing was going on in DC. Nobody went to work. (Well, except for us private sector go-getters.)

I remember reading an editorial shortly afterward that pointed out that for three days, as DC dug itself out, the Earth continued lazily spinning on its axis.

Both sides learned something over those three days.
The statists learned that they absolutely cannot allow the government to shut down. If they do, then people will figure out that the overwhelming majority of us will go on with life just fine without anyone telling them what to do.
So all this shutdown talk is just that. Talk.
If shut down, their game is all done. It's over.
So they're never going to let that happen. They'll drive the car straight into the river, lock the doors, and watch us all drown first.

On the other side, those who were paying attention learned the fatal flaw with conservative rhetoric.
It's not spending that's the biggest problem - it's that they're doing something with that money.
We've been living with giant deficits since the 1960's. We've been paying for socialized medicine for just as long.
Deficits don't shut down your daughter's lemonade stand.
Deficits don't throw you in jail for possession of plants.
Socialized medicine doesn't break in your door and shoot your husband.

It's not the money that's the problem - it's what they're doing. And the solution is obvious: pay them to go away.
If we simply offered to everyone working in the Department of Education that they could stay home all day, or get other jobs, and still get paid, then there would be no Department in a week.
Eventually they all die.

But if a shutdown was allowed to happen, then people might start listening to me.

 

[69360]

Once O'Care has it's roots spread throughout the system, it will require digging up the all of the leach lines and replacing them to get rid of it. And there are miles and miles of leach lines in this country, and that ain't going to happen until it's all abandoned.

So, it depends. Do you want to save what's left and repair it, or just start over?

Obamacare may fail on it's own, I don't discount the possibility. If not the country won't end in 3 years. If the GOP can take the senate and white house, which is possible, then they can end it. It's just rhetoric and talk now.

The debt ceiling is winnable and the public will be more sympathetic IMO.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Obamacare may fail on it's own, I don't discount the possibility. If not the country won't end in 3 years. If the GOP can take the senate and white house, which is possible, then they can end it. It's just rhetoric and talk now.

The debt ceiling is winnable and the public will be more sympathetic IMO.

The GOP will end O'Care about the same time they end SSI and Medicare, bring the troops home and close foreign bases, stop toppling and interfering with other governments, etc. All of which destroy wealth and interfere with nature/mutual-rights.

 

[Carson]

From lurking over the past few weeks, I know theres been tidbits and such forth mentioned here and there, though it seems much of the focus is still on Obamacare.

The mainstream media is all reporting how the government's shutdown will affect your every day life, and what not, and continuously talking about how it can harm you.

But how do you think it could help you, or at least, the nation?
Just interested in everyone's perspectives

Sorry if I missed a thread regarding this

I haven't read any of the other post yet. I'm thinking we need to look at this on a more personal level.

Imagine this is just about you and your household. You've messed up your finances to the point the others in the household can no longer survive with helping you out. At some point you may have to file bankruptcy. It's brutal but it could be what's needed for you and the others.

If you look at this in a national scale all of the money for those that hate has over taxed us to the point normal time honored businesses can no longer keep up with the fake money presses.

Cutting them off could give the honest hard earned dollar a voice in the way things are done again and the nation can get back to work.

 

[69360]

The GOP will end O'Care about the same time they end SSI and Medicare, bring the troops home and close foreign bases, stop toppling and interfering with other governments, etc. All of which destroy wealth and interfere with nature/mutual-rights.

Very possible but the GOP is undergoing big changes now. I'm cautiously optimistic.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Thing is, even if they "shut it down", the vast majority of it will stay open for business. Sadly.

 

[69360]

Thing is, even if they "shut it down", the vast majority of it will stay open for business. Sadly.

Oh no it won't, the tube will tell us it's doom and gloom, end of the world fire and brimstone without big brother to save and guide us.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Very possible but the GOP is undergoing big changes now. I'm cautiously optimistic.

Cautious is good.

Let's say that we get more people in the senate like Ted Cruz or Rand, but they're not exactly like him or Rand. So, what they want to do in any particular instance is not completely understood or thought of as the "proper" or more "politically beneficial" way.

How will that help? We just had an example of how even "somewhat liberty" politicians can have resistance or "lack of support" from other "somewhat liberty" politicians. "It's not politically expedient for 2016 to do this at this time" and other so called "excuses" to not take action then becomes "inaction".

 

[jkr]

roads?

ROADS!