logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Screw those who are essential and work?, The Trump shut-down.
Supposn
post Jan 10 2019, 08:48 PM
Post #1


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 154
Member No.: 12,766
Joined: October-19-12

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Screw those who are essential and work?? The Trump shut-down.

If the link provided at the end of this post is correct:
Those furloughed federal employees considered as not essential and are not currently working for the federal government, can tide themselves over by gainfully working full-time if they can find such opportunities. They can also work part-time and/or qualify for unemployment benefits.

Those federal employees considered essential and required to continue working without pay, are entitled to work part-time if they can find work that doesn't conflict with their federal work schedule, but they are not entitled to receive unemployment benefits.

In most if not all cases when federal employees MAY receive back-pay, the state will legally recover any unemployment benefits they paid out for the back-paid period.

In summary, there's no financial remedy for federal employees that actually do work for our federal government during Trump's shut-down.
Does this seem logical to anyone except President Donald Trump?

Refer to:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/do...hp_minor_pos19

Many furloughed federal employees can receive unemployment while on temporary leave of absence, but not all. Federal employees who are expected to report to work, even without pay, do not qualify for unemployment benefits. Federal workers should be wary. In most states, as well as D.C., if these workers collect unemployment benefits and then receive retroactive pay, they’ll be required to repay the government.

Respectfully, Supposn
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 4)
Hobbes
post Jan 11 2019, 07:30 PM
Post #2


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,333
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



What question did you want to have debated here?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
net2007
post Jan 15 2019, 02:18 AM
Post #3


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,238
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



I may have more information if you expand with some questions but if it were me, I would have classified this shutdown as the Trump/Schumer/Pelosi shut-down, rather than just "The Trump Shut-Down". To explain, there are two reasons for the partial government shut-down, Trump and many Republicans being unwilling to support a spending bill that doesn't have wall funding in it, and the Democrats unwillingness to support a spending bill that does have wall funding. Set aside who has the better position on whether or not we should build a fence/wall, neither side can agree on what would be an important policy decision, therefore we have a shutdown.

Trump makes the mistake of trying to own this shut-down. If he wants a wall it would have helped a lot more to simply make sure wall funding remained in the Republicans spending bill and then just let the Democrats refuse to support such a bill. Instead, he adds rhethoric into the mix, I think because he wants to portray himself as brave. Shutdowns aren't popular, during the last one polling dropped for the Democrats because they voted in far lower numbers to fund the government so Trump should have learned from that. This is one of many times where his own rhethoric has backfired.

Having said that, the Democrats don't look any better, perhaps even worse. Nancy and Chuck's response to Trump's oval office address was downright creepy and gained criticism from both sides. Ever see "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" or "The Invasion"? Aliens try to take over the human race by taking over their minds. Slowly but surely people started to behave strangely and appeared like a shell of their prior selves. In other words, they appeared a bit mindless because they were imposters who would lie to achieve a goal that they wouldn't state upfront, control of the human race. That's what Nancy and Chuck looked like and coincidently, gaining control and power is one of their primary ulterior motives as well.

Some Democrats want a steady flow of migrants across the southern border because they know that they'll vote in higher numbers for them which will help Democrats maintain power. I'm not saying that no Democrat in office genuinely cares about the situation that some of these migrants are in but often their concern goes in one direction. They pay less attention to something like the child abuse and deaths that occur as migrants travel here to cross the border illegally and more attention to a child if they die in U.S. custody, which happens far less often. Sometimes it just appears that they care the most when something bad happens if it benefits their policy stances so it's fair to ask if those types genuinely care.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Jan 16 2019, 04:15 AM
Post #4


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,379
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



It's Trump's shutdown because he claimed it publicly on TV. He's trying to wriggle out of it by blaming the Democrats for not giving him what he wants, and he's unwilling to negotiate or listen to anyone else. No big surprise there.

His reasoning is very faulty, claiming that the wall will fix problems of his own making. The wall has no support from anyone who knows the problems at the border, but that's not the point anyway. Trump just wants everyone to capitulate to his demands, which he needs in order to become Supreme Leader (tyrant).

Well, most of us won't let him. He has another election season coming his way, and this time there's no question about who this guy really is. It's also not looking good for the Republican Senate, since it could override Trump's veto if it wanted. But instead it's capitulating to Trump's demands.

What's really boneheaded about this situation is that the last time the Republicans shut down government for a long period, it resulted in them getting blamed for it as well. I can understand why Trump did it due to his ignorance, but the Senate's move to capitulate is mysterious. Maybe the leadership wants Trump to become Supreme Leader, thereby opening the door to all kinds of power plays against democracy in a constitutional republic? Or maybe it's simple stupidity?

Or maybe this is the Republican Party being abandoned as hopeless by those still in its leadership roles?

Maybe it's all about saving face for the Senators? Or something? Very mystifying.

Anyway, public opinion is heading out the door, down the hall, into the street and hailing a cab to someplace else, which for now is the Democratic Party. I don't see that changing while Trump is still POTUS, and same for Pence if his political career survives the witch hunt, which has nabbed quite a few metaphorical witches already.

If Pence goes down the Trump vortex, that leaves Pelosi as POTUS.

I'm not at all doubtful that Republican leadership realizes this, which might explain the capitulation. I'm not so sure that Trump grasps what this would mean. Maybe he doesn't care? Let Pelosi take over until a POTUS is elected in 2020? Oh, he could be counting on this to get some kind of favors from the Republican Party, which would be able to run someone else in 2020.

That would make perfect sense. Trouble is lots of former Republican supporters are being dinked during the shutdown, and people tend to remember such experiences the rest of their lives.

Anyway, it really sucks and it's all Trump's doing. He's pretty much done and should resign ASAP for his own good. I am kinda enjoying his discomfort but sympathize with everyone suffering because of him. Even those who helped him get the Electoral College victory -- unemployment/working for no pay/trying to recover from hurricanes and floods and fires are all too high of a price to pay for getting conned.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
net2007
post Jan 20 2019, 12:51 AM
Post #5


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,238
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



AuthorMusician

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Jan 15 2019, 11:15 PM) *
It's Trump's shutdown because he claimed it publicly on TV. He's trying to wriggle out of it by blaming the Democrats for not giving him what he wants, and he's unwilling to negotiate or listen to anyone else. No big surprise there.

His reasoning is very faulty, claiming that the wall will fix problems of his own making. The wall has no support from anyone who knows the problems at the border, but that's not the point anyway. Trump just wants everyone to capitulate to his demands, which he needs in order to become Supreme Leader (tyrant).

Well, most of us won't let him. He has another election season coming his way, and this time there's no question about who this guy really is. It's also not looking good for the Republican Senate, since it could override Trump's veto if it wanted. But instead it's capitulating to Trump's demands.

What's really boneheaded about this situation is that the last time the Republicans shut down government for a long period, it resulted in them getting blamed for it as well. I can understand why Trump did it due to his ignorance, but the Senate's move to capitulate is mysterious. Maybe the leadership wants Trump to become Supreme Leader, thereby opening the door to all kinds of power plays against democracy in a constitutional republic? Or maybe it's simple stupidity?

Or maybe this is the Republican Party being abandoned as hopeless by those still in its leadership roles?

Maybe it's all about saving face for the Senators? Or something? Very mystifying.

Anyway, public opinion is heading out the door, down the hall, into the street and hailing a cab to someplace else, which for now is the Democratic Party. I don't see that changing while Trump is still POTUS, and same for Pence if his political career survives the witch hunt, which has nabbed quite a few metaphorical witches already.

If Pence goes down the Trump vortex, that leaves Pelosi as POTUS.

I'm not at all doubtful that Republican leadership realizes this, which might explain the capitulation. I'm not so sure that Trump grasps what this would mean. Maybe he doesn't care? Let Pelosi take over until a POTUS is elected in 2020? Oh, he could be counting on this to get some kind of favors from the Republican Party, which would be able to run someone else in 2020.

That would make perfect sense. Trouble is lots of former Republican supporters are being dinked during the shutdown, and people tend to remember such experiences the rest of their lives.

Anyway, it really sucks and it's all Trump's doing. He's pretty much done and should resign ASAP for his own good. I am kinda enjoying his discomfort but sympathize with everyone suffering because of him. Even those who helped him get the Electoral College victory -- unemployment/working for no pay/trying to recover from hurricanes and floods and fires are all too high of a price to pay for getting conned.


I agree with a fair share of the arguments you've made over the years, even in regards to Trump's temperament, but fail to understand your logic on this reply.

QUOTE
It's Trump's shutdown because he claimed it publicly on TV. He's trying to wriggle out of it by blaming the Democrats for not giving him what he wants, and he's unwilling to negotiate or listen to anyone else. No big surprise there.


I find it hard to believe that you think claiming something on TV makes it true. Maybe I'm wrong but I'd assume if I got on TV and took credit for all of your years of guitar playing that you would believe I wasn't being fair to you. Trump claims a lot of things, but the way I see it is that something is either true or it isn't true, whether or not someone claims it. While I think Trump has shot himself in the foot with some of his rhetoric, he has made some effort to negotiate.

Cost estimates for Trump's wall have varied, I've heard 15 billion, 18 billion, and just over 20 billion to complete his project. It'd certainly cost more than 5.7 billion but he didn't demand all of the money upfront. Additionally, some Democrats have been critical of the concept of a concrete wall and thought that a steel barrier would be better. Trump was willing to change his plan to something Democrats would sooner support but that didn't change their stance so it's fair to ask whether or not they were simply using that as a talking point. With these things considered Trump has done some in the way of negotiating and moderating his stance already.

Many Democrats supported similar proposals for a steel barrier in the past but seem unwilling to do anything like that with Trump in office. Many have been resistant to negotiating and even went on vacation shortly after becoming the majority in the House while Trump's stayed mostly in Washington focused on this issue. He's also meeting with border security agents and taking care of a few other things, but he's not vacationing. https://factba.se/topic/calendar Lastly, Nancy Pelosi sarcastically taunts Trump by saying she'll give him a dollar to fund his wall, just to name a few things. None of that is a good look for Democrats and reveals a lack of sincerity on the behalf of those acting in such a way. Do you not see any fault on their end?

I don't like Trump's childish behavior, I don't agree with several of his judgment calls, and am not aligned with him on every policy but the leadership within the Democratic party has created problems of their own and I don't understand why they shouldn't take some responsibility for this shutdown. You seem to be suggesting the opposite but can you point to anything I said that's false? For example, did Nancy Pelosi joke around about offering 1 dollar for the wall and is that type of sarcasm a good indicator that she wants to negotiate?

QUOTE
His reasoning is very faulty, claiming that the wall will fix problems of his own making. The wall has no support from anyone who knows the problems at the border, but that's not the point anyway. Trump just wants everyone to capitulate to his demands, which he needs in order to become Supreme Leader (tyrant).


Trump and many others said that other measures would need to be taken to secure the border, remember? I don't think he intends a wall or fence to be a cure-all solution, he's basically suggesting that a wall/fence is an important factor but it needs to come in combination with a broader strategy. Walls or fences are simply designed to make illegal border crossings more difficult and there have indeed been nations that have used them effectively. However, border barriers have to be patroled and other measures need to be taken to tackle other methods of crossing here illegally, such as immigrants who fly here and overstay their visa's.

America has a horribly disorganized immigration system in place because many politicians are pulling in opposite directions or don't want to get the situation under control and this problem predates the Trump administration and the current House and Senate. I say that because, for decades, both parties have simply put a band-aid on this problem rather than cooperating to put something more efficient in place. From what I see, the wall has support from many who know the problems at the border, do those who work in border security or with ICE not count? I realize the media has often portrayed them as bigoted, but have you been looking into their commentary and actions directly?

QUOTE
If Pence goes down the Trump vortex, that leaves Pelosi as POTUS.


If the Democrats try to advance to impeachment proceedings they'd need a two-thirds supermajority vote in the Senate to end Trumps presidency. For those who are wanting him impeached, there are two major obstacles they'd have to overcome. For starters, there wouldn't be equal justice under the law if they didn't look deeper into the Clintons and other Democrats who are corrupt and that'd cause backlash. Secondly, Republicans and Democrats are incredibly divided but would have to work together to boot Trump out of office.

To explain a little deeper, the extreme elements within the Democratic party don't seem interested in how much dirt has come up on the Clintons, or with people like Peter Srozk and Andrew McCabe. They haven't wanted to hold them accountable and over the years some have also done everything in their power to paint Republicans as intolerant, racist, bigoted, or ignorant. Now they need votes from Republicans and a LOT of them.

The only way I think they're going to get those votes is if they discover and prove that Trump is guilty of something like murder or rape. That may sound extreme but too many rules and laws have been bent or broken by prominent Democrats for Republicans to just wake up one morning and tell themselves that Trump should be held accountable for things that others commonly get away with. I wouldn't be surprised if the left and Robert Mueller eventually find something concrete on Trump and if they do find proof of Clinton level scandalous behavior, my take on it is that Trump, the Clintons, and anyone else who can't stop lying about the things they're doing wrong, should all face consequences.

I think the Dems are in a bit of a pickle over this issue and part of the reason they've often been hesitant to state that they want Trump impeached is because they know it could backfire. If you don't mind me saying this, if you personally don't believe that some of the leadership within the Democratic party is corrupt or unwilling to negotiate, there are news outlets and podcast that will share important information that pundits like Rachel Maddow leave out. I'm not going to tell you that everything she says is wrong but she typically presents the news in a way that protects Democrats while targeting Republicans. So much information is left out or considered unimportant on The Rachel Maddow Show and others like it.

That's not to say right wing media doesn't have a similar type of bias so perhaps a good approach is to get news from both the left and right. I'm willing to say that a fair amount of what left-wing media pundits say about Trump is accurate, it's just usually coming from one angle. There's so much more that can be added to their commentary.

This post has been edited by net2007: Jan 20 2019, 04:49 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: January 22nd, 2019 - 11:34 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.