<p>Air traffic controllers and construction projects were what was curtailed/furloughed at the FAA.
[FAA</a> faces partial shutdown - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/faa-faces-partial-shutdown/2011/07/22/gIQA64o3TI_story.html]FAA”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/faa-faces-partial-shutdown/2011/07/22/gIQA64o3TI_story.html)</p>
<p>Don’t go rushing to cash in your savings bonds.</p>
<p>I couldn’t agree with you more, Hayden. Who needs weather forecasters? And I’m sure everyone on College Confidential would welcome a Department of Education shutdown. It’s not as if anyone here has a child with a Pell grant, after all-- everybody here pays full tuition and is proud of it! And none of us have disabled kids in special ed either, I’m happy to say, so we can all say goodbye to that without a second thought.</p>
<p>Yes, let’s shut the Department of Commerce! Who would care about patenting their inventions in the US if the US is no longer a functional economy. Goodbye, USPTO. Good riddance, patent examiners! You will no longer be able to reject our inventions, because there will be no inventions.</p>
<p>bet they dont close the irs (may be the only one left standing lol) …they dont pay their bills, but boy they’ll be after us to pay ours :rolleyes:</p>
<p>This is a very good read:</p>
<p>[EconoMonitor</a> : Great Leap Forward President Obama Weighs-In on the Debt Limit Debate](<a href=“http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2011/07/26/president-obama-weighs-in-on-the-debt-limit-debate/]EconoMonitor”>http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2011/07/26/president-obama-weighs-in-on-the-debt-limit-debate/)</p>
<p>Personally, I think the deficit is too low. The problem is not the size of the deficit but what we spend it on. (and the debt ceiling is an artificial issue, created by Obama’s embrace of the Bush tax giveaways to my mother).</p>
<p>Mini, great link…</p>
<p>How did the country survive in our parents’ generation, before the government got so bloated?</p>
<p>How did the population of the US get so bloated?</p>
<p>TatinG…the standard of living was lower and the poverty rate was higher during our parent’s generation. (i’m not including the last several years).</p>
<p>And government spending as a percentage of gdp has been pretty consistent for decades.</p>
<p>The reason why the percentage is higher now is because the economy imploded.</p>
<p>I do like this chart…
<a href=“http://www.supportingevidence.com/Government/fed_debt_as_percent_GDP_over_time.html[/url]”>http://www.supportingevidence.com/Government/fed_debt_as_percent_GDP_over_time.html</a></p>
<p>And using the USPTO as an example… The invenions were simple: a six memebered ring with a couple of substituents or something like that. The volume of patent applications was much lower back then as well. It takes more people to examine and process the humongous number of very complex patent applications, even with all available searching technologies. BTW, the USPTO is a profitable organization, generating money through the fees we, inventors, pay.</p>
<p>The Agriculture Department has been around in some form since at least the 1830’s and as a cabinet level department since 1889, so I am guessing that most of our parents are younger than the USDA.</p>
<p>TatinG, why do you peg your question to our parents’ generation? Do you think that all American gov’t was created in the last generation? That’s not the case. Our govt has evolved over time, usually in recognition of a need. Just because someone doesn’t know all parts of the govt doesn’t mean you don’t benefit from those activities, whether you know it or not. There are those who dismiss all govt on some strange assumption that they’re pointy headed pencil pushers writing silly pamphlets. Sure there is some of that. But mostly govt does a lot of stuff that we as a society have agreed over time that we need done. Like making sure when you go to the store you won’t die from contaminated food; that when you take a job you’ve got someone on your side ensuring you won’t go deaf or have a fatal accident from equipment no one maintained; and that you can leave for higher ground if a hurricane is predicted. Or that Bill Gates can invent something knowing his ownership will be protected from ripoff. How did we survive before all this? Ask 6,000 people in Galvaston back around 1906. Or before that, thousands in Newport RI. Or anyone who drives on our interstate highway system.</p>
<p>From Mini’s link (great link - thanks Mini!)</p>
<p>“The United States has also experienced six periods of depression. The depressions began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1929. Every significant reduction of the outstanding debt has been followed by a depression, and every depression has been preceded by significant debt reduction. Further, every budget surplus has been followed, sooner or later, by renewed deficits.”</p>
<p>And Tatin - our parents grew up in the Great Depression. No thanks.</p>
<p>And while we’re getting rid of government agencies, let’s dispose of Nixon’s EPA. It was great having trash all over the roads, sewage stink at the waterfront in every major city, and toxics spewing into the rivers and groundwater supplies. I loved the smell on the highways. Oh yes and NTSA - who needs safety in cars, right?</p>
<p>So, from a historical perspective, there are “some” who would deliberately throw us into depression, and others who would “go along”.</p>
<p>We need MORE debt, not less.</p>
<p>This link shows that the government will spend every nickel we send their way. If I had donated $$ for this program, I would be very angry.</p>
<p>[Showdown</a> encourages citizens to give gifts to reduce debt - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/showdown-encourages-citizens-to-give-gifts-to-reduce-debt/2011/07/21/gIQAfjZQXI_story.html]Showdown”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/showdown-encourages-citizens-to-give-gifts-to-reduce-debt/2011/07/21/gIQAfjZQXI_story.html)</p>
<p>MODERATOR’S NOTE: </p>
<p>Please limit discussion to RAMIFICATIONS of the debt ceiling issue. Do not criticize political parties, leaders, etc.</p>
<p>Ramifications? More uncertainty. More collective angst. </p>
<p>It seems like it will have to be quite painful but perhaps it will be a good thing in the end. I think people are growing weary of the bipolar political landscape of the two parties, constantly screaming at each other, heels dug in, playing shamelessly to their bases.</p>
<p>Now would be a very good moment for a real leader to emerge. I don’t think we have one (sadly) who is providing the country with any real sense of direction and confidence. This doesn’t have to be the president. It could be from either of the houses, a candidate running for 2012, a thought leader from the media or academics. </p>
<p>I keep thinking about the “exceptional leader” theory and of how an individual can come along at certain moments and truly impact the direction of a society. Please no Hitlers! But we do need someone who has that rare but unmistakable gift of leadership.</p>
<p>Again, we have a crisis of leadership most likely because of the two-party system. It just doesn’t work anymore.</p>
<p>Scariest thing I’ve heard so far was from an (if I recall correctly) op-ed piece in the WSJ. An economist looked back to the 1970’s, when there was a “technical” default. The economist said that ended up causing a 0.6% permanent increase in interest on the national debt.</p>
<p>I received a note back from one of my siblings on SS income for my mother. She didn’t have the exact amount but it looks easily manageable with everyone contributing. It’s also manageable with just one or two contributing based on my vague understanding of the others’ finances (which isn’t great).</p>
<p>I mentioned the issue to my son about graduate school loans and he was incredulous. I also mentioned that both parties have the same position on cuts. So that will most likely get cut regardless of the short-term outcome. We then got into a discussion about why both parties are willing to cut it.</p>
<p>The hypothetical outcomes are great for discussions with your kids on priorities.</p>
<p>SlitheyTove - that is just one of the reason that I am so angry. This is an artificial argument that should be covered during the budget process. Now the ratings agencies are talking about downgrading us anyway…and even though the Treasury Bonds are still a good deal for international investors today, it doesn’t mean that they will be tomorrow. We have fundamental differences in this country that need serious discussion, but fighting it during this timeline has proven that speedy compromise does not equal thoughtful compromise.</p>