Government Shutdown - Sep 2025 Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point you are all missing is that the government won't get unshut down. It's down and out permanently. It suits the executive branch of the current administration to be able to bypass congress. You are now in a one-party system. An autocracy. A dictatorship and the government will never look the same as it did yesterday.

Put down the crack pipe.

Take off the blinders.

DP, but you think the public at large won’t lose their minds when TSA agents and ATC stop showing up? When SSA field office workers stop coming in because they’re not getting paid? We are still allowed by law to take off if we’re sick and be placed in temporary furlough status. I’m at an agency this administration actually likes and already know multiple people approved for furlough the rest of the week and this will spread when the people still showing up realize they’re the only ones working.

There is a time limit on how long people will show up without a paycheck. You think the military will accept this indefinitely too?

At some point even MAGA in Congress will realize they need to come to the table and pass something. I doubt the public will remain loyal to this administration once they are missing their vacation and can’t get an appointment for a new SS card.

[Anonymous]

RIF notices going out this morning to USPTO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my supervisor just got unfurloughed 5 min ago.

Unfurloughed. Well that's a new term.

Antifur - antifurloughed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

I can think of multiple political reasons. The crappy part is that this is a win-win for them either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

You didn’t explain why the shutdown is necessary for any of that or why they didn’t do all this already.

It seems like you’re just peddling fear to get people to bug Democrats into rolling over for the current CR… which is kind of pointless since none of the horrible things you insist will happen depend on there being a shutdown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

I can think of multiple political reasons. The crappy part is that this is a win-win for them either way.

And yet you’ve shared none of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

You didn’t explain why the shutdown is necessary for any of that or why they didn’t do all this already.

It seems like you’re just peddling fear to get people to bug Democrats into rolling over for the current CR… which is kind of pointless since none of the horrible things you insist will happen depend on there being a shutdown.

They’ve only shutdown is necessary to consolidate power. They didn’t do it yet because they have a clear step by step plan, which is out there and easily accessible for you to read. I was a Democracy specialist at USAID. We studied autocracy, worked in various dictatorships for many years. I’m just calling it like I see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

You didn’t explain why the shutdown is necessary for any of that or why they didn’t do all this already.

It seems like you’re just peddling fear to get people to bug Democrats into rolling over for the current CR… which is kind of pointless since none of the horrible things you insist will happen depend on there being a shutdown.

They’ve only shutdown is necessary to consolidate power. They didn’t do it yet because they have a clear step by step plan, which is out there and easily accessible for you to read. I was a Democracy specialist at USAID. We studied autocracy, worked in various dictatorships for many years. I’m just calling it like I see it.

Why don’t you just provide the plan instead of alluding to it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RIF notices going out this morning to USPTO.

Damn, really? Were these already planned or as a result of the shutdown? Totally awful either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

You didn’t explain why the shutdown is necessary for any of that or why they didn’t do all this already.

It seems like you’re just peddling fear to get people to bug Democrats into rolling over for the current CR… which is kind of pointless since none of the horrible things you insist will happen depend on there being a shutdown.

They’ve only shutdown is necessary to consolidate power. They didn’t do it yet because they have a clear step by step plan, which is out there and easily accessible for you to read. I was a Democracy specialist at USAID. We studied autocracy, worked in various dictatorships for many years. I’m just calling it like I see it.

Why don’t you just provide the plan instead of alluding to it?

It's Project 2025
An indexed version - https://www.project2025index.com/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The budget plan, if passed, will permanently fire thousands more feds. The budget cuts to the major federal agencies cannot be implemented without a brutal shrinkage of the labor force. Vought has always been working towards this, he said so.

So the threats of shutdown layoffs are only the start of what's coming down the pipe ANYWAY.

This is why Democrats cannot back down here. They cannot be seen to be complicit with this horrendous budget.

Democrats will cave. They always cave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RIF notices going out this morning to USPTO.

Damn, really? Were these already planned or as a result of the shutdown? Totally awful either way.

HHS sent out 9/30 RIF notices to some people who were left over from the April 1 bloodbath, so this is likely similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who are like, "it will get challenged in court" or "there's no appropriation so it can't happen" or "Congress won't agree" have never lived in a dictatorship and/or have no imagination. The administration has had many brilliant people thinking about this for many years. It will happen.

I know you are thinking why would brilliant people support this? Monopolies. Economic monopolies lead to political monopolies, just like in Nazi Germany. Billionaires think the democratic state is conspiring against them, holding them back from implementing their brilliant ideas with their dumb laws.

Your argument is that they will shutdown the government “forever” but also pay their preferred people while it’s shutdown. Where is the money coming from in that scenario? Be specific.

That's actually not a hard question. The Treasury HAS money from tax collection, fees, revenues, etc. The appropriations process is Congress giving permission and direction for spending it.

Do you know which branch of government runs the Treasury? This year OMB already slowed release of my agency's appropriated funds from the Treasury to keep us from bring able to spend them all as Congress directed. What would keep them from doing the reverse? Just the Constitution? Good luck.

If they could do that they would have already. Why haven’t they?

They’ve only been in power, what 8 months!? First they DOGE’d. Then they deployed the military. Now this. It was planned for the end of the fiscal year. What’s next? Full consolidation. Direct payments sidelining Congress. Then, democrats lose more seats and voila, Congress maybe gets some authority back.

You didn’t explain why the shutdown is necessary for any of that or why they didn’t do all this already.

It seems like you’re just peddling fear to get people to bug Democrats into rolling over for the current CR… which is kind of pointless since none of the horrible things you insist will happen depend on there being a shutdown.

They’ve only shutdown is necessary to consolidate power. They didn’t do it yet because they have a clear step by step plan, which is out there and easily accessible for you to read. I was a Democracy specialist at USAID. We studied autocracy, worked in various dictatorships for many years. I’m just calling it like I see it.

Why don’t you just provide the plan instead of alluding to it?

It's Project 2025
An indexed version - https://www.project2025index.com/

Link me to the part that spells out their plan to shutdown the government forever and still pay favored employees without Congress appropriating money.

[Anonymous]

its business as usual at my agency.