The Money Mustache Community
Around the Internet => Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy => Topic started by: anon1234 on January 15, 2019, 08:55:01 AM
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
-
I think we can afford to be more generous in our thoughts towards others, as our wealth ought to be more than just in money.
-
My thoughts? This shutdown is unprecedented in length. The vast majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck and have little savings, even if they don't have consumer debt. Many government workers are not highly paid.
The situation is a mess. I don't think this is a wall of shame issue at all. Many people are working, without pay. That's not how our economy works.
It's interesting you grant an "excuse" to one guy, since you know him, but not to thousands of others whose situations you don't know. Getting a part time job isn't easy; especially when the people hiring know you will be leaving very soon. It's highly unlikely that is a sustainable solution for most furloughed workers (plus many are still having to go to work!)
-
I think we can afford to be more generous in our thoughts towards others, as our wealth ought to be more than just in money.
I love this phrasing!
-
I have to be honest, I forgot the shutdown was happening at all until I came to these forums. It's nice to not pay attention to the 24 hour news cycle.
While you may be right that their lack of savings is largely their own doing, spending time to rub their faces in it or proclaim your superiority doesn't really do anything helpful.
-
I think we can afford to be more generous in our thoughts towards others, as our wealth ought to be more than just in money.
This.
-
I'm guessing you have never been in a situation where suddenly your job/income are taken away from you and you are unsure of how you will pay bills, and you also are unsure of if/when you will have a job again. Lucky you! That is very fortunate. You don't know the individual situations of these many workers, and the only thing that should be expressed towards them in this unfortunate situation is empathy, not judgement.
-
I'm personally inclined towards generosity towards the hundreds of thousands of people being held hostage by their own government. Each person involved in this fiasco has their own story to tell. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency fall under the heading of financial shame and comedy. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency categorically do not fall under shame and comedy. I'm not going to parse them.
ETA: As background, all government works paid semiannual are indeed 'missing' their first paycheck today, 15-Jan. Government workers paid on a biweekly basis have already missed one complete paycheck, which should have been distributed on 10-Jan. Worse, we are perilously close to payroll submission for the second check. If the govt doesn't reopen by Friday 18-Jan, then submission can't occur, which means the biweeklies are virtually guaranteed to miss a second check.
-
I'm personally inclined towards generosity towards the hundreds of thousands of people being held hostage by their own government. Each person involved in this fiasco has their own story to tell. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency fall under the heading of financial shame and comedy. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency categorically do not fall under shame and comedy. I'm not going to parse them.
Sigh, i guess i pounded that out quickly, attempting to start a discussion on the unmustachianness of not having an emergency fund, and put my foot in my mouth and came across as a dick
I think you said it perfectly, sailor sam
Hopefully these incompetent kindergarten politics end soon
-
While you may be right that their lack of savings is largely their own doing, spending time to rub their faces in it or proclaim your superiority doesn't really do anything helpful.
To be fair there is an awful lot of that on the wall of shame and comedy... It's most of the board I believe
-
I have to be honest, I forgot the shutdown was happening at all until I came to these forums. It's nice to not pay attention to the 24 hour news cycle.
While you may be right that their lack of savings is largely their own doing, spending time to rub their faces in it or proclaim your superiority doesn't really do anything helpful.
The effect on non-government workers is much more subtle. We'll notice it when the lack of food inspections fails the safety of our system, for instance. (I think some food inspectors have been placed on critical duty and are working without pay, but for awhile they were all on leave; and the longer this goes on the more "calling in sick" I think will happen.)
I suspect those not getting paid are having a tough time forgetting it is happening.
-
I suspect those not getting paid are having a tough time forgetting it is happening.
If the vast majority of those affected are those who work for the government, then what is the point of the government? I'm not trying to argue that we should abolish the government and live in anarchy, but a significant portion of what the federal government does is fairly useless and sucks up tax dollars (or increases national debt).
The FDA (as you mentioned) is a good example of a useful federal program. So are homeland security and a few other areas. For the most part, however, these are items that should operate at the state level or even lower. America is so large and diverse that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to policy does not work.
-
I'm personally inclined towards generosity towards the hundreds of thousands of people being held hostage by their own government. Each person involved in this fiasco has their own story to tell. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency fall under the heading of financial shame and comedy. Certainly some of the stories of insolvency categorically do not fall under shame and comedy. I'm not going to parse them.
Sigh, i guess i pounded that out quickly, attempting to start a discussion on the unmustachianness of not having an emergency fund, and put my foot in my mouth and came across as a dick
I think you said it perfectly, sailor sam
Hopefully these incompetent kindergarten politics end soon
It takes a fair amount of integrity to apologize, and even more to apologize on the internet. So good on ya.
-
I suspect those not getting paid are having a tough time forgetting it is happening.
If the vast majority of those affected are those who work for the government, then what is the point of the government? I'm not trying to argue that we should abolish the government and live in anarchy, but a significant portion of what the federal government does is fairly useless and sucks up tax dollars (or increases national debt).
The FDA (as you mentioned) is a good example of a useful federal program. So is homeland security and a few other areas. For the most part, however, these are items that should operate at the state level or even lower. America is so large and diverse that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to policy does not work.
If 100% of the FDA shut down tomorrow, few people would notice it. Many of the things that they do are important, but not immediately evident. After a year of nobody working, there would likely be multiple cases of food and drug related deaths though.
There's also the fact that many in the government are still forced to work even though they're not being paid. This kinda minimizes the impact of the government shut down. If it was illegal for involuntary servitude in the US, I suspect that the impact of the government shutdown would be much more strongly felt. Every air traffic controller in the country would stop working, so no flights would take place. There would be no border agents preventing illegal immigration. The CDC, EPA, FDA, FCC, SEC, etc. would all shut down. If you honestly believe that most of what the Federal government does is useless, you should be rallying to stop the legalized slavery that is going on and truly allow the government to shut down.
-
I suspect those not getting paid are having a tough time forgetting it is happening.
If the vast majority of those affected are those who work for the government, then what is the point of the government? I'm not trying to argue that we should abolish the government and live in anarchy, but a significant portion of what the federal government does is fairly useless and sucks up tax dollars (or increases national debt).
The FDA (as you mentioned) is a good example of a useful federal program. So are homeland security and a few other areas. For the most part, however, these are items that should operate at the state level or even lower. America is so large and diverse that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to policy does not work.
There are a lot of federal government agencies that were designed to be state controlled, and if you look at how many government agencies have shrunk over time... Not many, if any
Almost all organizations, governments included, grow organically and resist shrinking. And the natural scope creep of power is that it moves uphill over time. Perfect example is, if you don't let the feds regulate your drinking age, you don't get federal funding for roads.
Very few leaders will say "I want this power forever moved downhill out of my hands" and even fewer that can convince everyone around them that is a good idea
After 200 years we as a country definitely need a calm, orderly, well planned house cleaning to shake off the cobwebs and help the system run more smoothly, as evidenced by the fact that government shutdowns are now a borderline common part of the political systems
That unpointed ramble said, I can't think of anything the federal government does that should be 100% done away with, and I don't understand your logic of "the federal government workers are the ones most impacted by the government shutdown, therefore government isn't necessary"
That's like saying "airplane making employees are most hurt by airplane companies shutting down, therefore airplane companies are unnecessary"
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
Why are air traffic controllers often used as the example? If the federal government didn't regulate it, couldn't airlines/airports pay their own air traffic controllers?
-
I suspect those not getting paid are having a tough time forgetting it is happening.
If the vast majority of those affected are those who work for the government, then what is the point of the government? I'm not trying to argue that we should abolish the government and live in anarchy, but a significant portion of what the federal government does is fairly useless and sucks up tax dollars (or increases national debt).
The FDA (as you mentioned) is a good example of a useful federal program. So are homeland security and a few other areas. For the most part, however, these are items that should operate at the state level or even lower. America is so large and diverse that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to policy does not work.
Most of what the government does is not immediately apparent. 30 days isn't enough to notice. But eventually bridges fall, closed airports, no military, air unsafe to breathe, lack of clean water, no tax refunds, no social security payments, gas pumps that drastically short you on fills; these things would be noticed. As someone else said- the reason we aren't noticing vital services disappearing is people are being forced to work without pay. How long do you think that should continue? Say the government shut down for years- those people would stop working. I'm not going to keep arguing with a libertarian who thinks we don't need government at all, but I think the government has a purpose. The work gets done because people get paid to do it.
The state level design was created when the US was vastly smaller. I don't know that the founding fathers could have envisioned the population we have now. If there was no federal infastructure program, there would be states where it was dangerous to drive on their bridges (already there kind of are...) We wouldn't be able to have interstate commerce the way we do now.
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
Why are air traffic controllers often used as the example? If the federal government didn't regulate it, couldn't airlines/airports pay their own air traffic controllers?
Maybe. But would they communicate interline well enough to prevent crashes?
Could some random start up just start flying and would they interfer with air traffic controlled by a different tower?
My cousin (a United pilot) says licenses are also federally regulated. The longer this goes on, the more pilots who can't fly. Eventually airlines won't be able to staff flights.
-
Why are air traffic controllers often used as the example? If the federal government didn't regulate it, couldn't airlines/airports pay their own air traffic controllers?
Airlines are just the customers. The controllers organize all traffic by the different airlines for passengers and transport of goods, military flights, flying doctors and other air traffic. Airports are sometimes privatedly owned with their own controller, but they only control take off and landing on that airport. General air transport between airports is managed by controllers who are not connected to an airport, but to a whole geographic area. They also control the approach to the different airports in their area.
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
Good idea. That might work.
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
Thank you for editing and clarifying once you realized this discussion doesn't belong here.
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
Good karma points for you.
Now if you point to individuals who went and bought new SUVs while also bitching about not getting their paycheck and having no savings; I can get behind mocking that.
-
Maybe on the bright side Americans will see the future with a little less confidence and decide an emergency fund is a good thing. So is FU money.
-
Maybe on the bright side Americans will see the future with a little less confidence and decide an emergency fund is a good thing. So is FU money.
Nah, they'll just blame <insert scapegoat here> and go back to living the same way they did before.
It would be nice though.
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
Seems like we would close the borders, not open them, if we shut down border patrol completely?
They wouldn't enforce the border, but we'd physically close the roadways at the very least.
-
The average person is not feeling the pinch of the shutdown because most workers are still working albeit without pay. 95% of federal law enforcement is in work without pay status. The Coast Guard is part of the Dept. of Homeland Security. If all of the shutdown workers that missed their paycheck on Friday refused to come to work, the American people would see the chaos quickly.
To OP: I very much appreciate you editing your post. Some very responsible people that I know are hurting right now. One has a wife on unpaid maternity leave with their older child still in daycare. They have to pay for the daycare either way so that the spot is saved. She's on unpaid leave because there was a wait list to get into any daycare. They pay for daycare through a dependent care account that they cannot access because of the shutdown. No one is there to process it. Husband didn't get his paycheck Friday. They are using their savings to supplement mom's unexpected longer than planned leave.
Another friend had a huge emergency fund. Spent a chunk on unsuccessful infertility treatments last year. Is spending another chunk on adoption. Literally, the weekend before the first missed paycheck, had his furnace and water heater go out. Luckily his wife is still working but that emergency fund ended up depleted.
-
Close the airports and open the borders. See how long it takes for the shutdown supporters to notice...
Seems like we would close the borders, not open them, if we shut down border patrol completely?
They wouldn't enforce the border, but we'd physically close the roadways at the very least.
That should totally stop people from moving across the borders then. Build that roadblock! Build that roadblock!
-
I feel so bad for everyone affected. I really hate Trump.
-
Does anyone know if Trump signed the bill that the house and senate passed to retroactively pay the shutdown and furloughed workers? He said he would but there was no press blurb saying he actually did. I don't trust him!
-
I agree with others here advocating empathy and compassion (but I'm gonna play devil's advocate).
OTOH, how is this any different than when someone in this same shame and comedy section shames those who have no $ immediately after a layoff? We say everyone should be prepared for being fired tomorrow for any reason. How is this any different, especially in an industry where shutdowns (albeit they are never this long, so it's exceptional) happen once every few years?
No one bats an eye or says boo when someone on the relatives or heard at work or neighbors thread shames a consumer sucka for not being prepared for losing their job...what's the difference??
Hypothesis 1: the widespread reach of govt shutdowns. Many (most?) people, myself included, know someone affected.
Hypothesis 2: shutdowns are obvi political and this is arguably all thanks to The Great Orange One.
-
I agree with others here advocating empathy and compassion (but I'm gonna play devil's advocate).
OTOH, how is this any different than when someone in this same shame and comedy section shames those who have no $ immediately after a layoff? We say everyone should be prepared for being fired tomorrow for any reason. How is this any different, especially in an industry where shutdowns (albeit they are never this long, so it's exceptional) happen once every few years?
No one bats an eye or says boo when someone on the relatives or heard at work or neighbors thread shames a consumer sucka for not being prepared for losing their job...what's the difference??
Hypothesis 1: the widespread reach of govt shutdowns. Many (most?) people, myself included, know someone affected.
Hypothesis 2: shutdowns are obvi political and this is arguably all thanks to The Great Orange One.
I personally wouldn't shame someone for not having money in a layoff either, unless I knew they had been really really irresponsible. I'm not much of a face puncher to the average Joe.
-
I agree with others here advocating empathy and compassion (but I'm gonna play devil's advocate).
OTOH, how is this any different than when someone in this same shame and comedy section shames those who have no $ immediately after a layoff? We say everyone should be prepared for being fired tomorrow for any reason. How is this any different, especially in an industry where shutdowns (albeit they are never this long, so it's exceptional) happen once every few years?
No one bats an eye or says boo when someone on the relatives or heard at work or neighbors thread shames a consumer sucka for not being prepared for losing their job...what's the difference??
Hypothesis 1: the widespread reach of govt shutdowns. Many (most?) people, myself included, know someone affected.
Hypothesis 2: shutdowns are obvi political and this is arguably all thanks to The Great Orange One.
Well, my general hypothesis is we shouldn't shame anyone, let alone have a board specifically dedicated to the dubious practice. It's an unpopular opinion, so mostly it's must me shouting in a field and spurring Rocinante towards those goddamn indestructible windmills. ;)
-
I'm guessing you have never been in a situation where suddenly your job/income are taken away from you and you are unsure of how you will pay bills, and you also are unsure of if/when you will have a job again. Lucky you! That is very fortunate. You don't know the individual situations of these many workers, and the only thing that should be expressed towards them in this unfortunate situation is empathy, not judgement.
Replacement jobs aren't as easy to come by now as they were 20-25 years ago. These days, even call center employees and cart pushers have to jump through several rounds of interviews, drug testing, background checks, credit checks, personality tests, and other forms of modern astrology to determine whether they will "fit". The local Wal-Mart, for example, has an online application process with a "quiz" that re-re-re-reasks the same set of questions in a variety of different orders. It takes over an hour to get through. A desperate but highly literate person (someone who's over a barrel financially) can get through it but most people from the left side of the bell curve can't, despite the fact that they would perform competently in the job if they had it. It doesn't take a celestial IQ to bag groceries, mop floors, or stock shelves.
-
I agree with others here advocating empathy and compassion (but I'm gonna play devil's advocate).
OTOH, how is this any different than when someone in this same shame and comedy section shames those who have no $ immediately after a layoff? We say everyone should be prepared for being fired tomorrow for any reason. How is this any different, especially in an industry where shutdowns (albeit they are never this long, so it's exceptional) happen once every few years?
No one bats an eye or says boo when someone on the relatives or heard at work or neighbors thread shames a consumer sucka for not being prepared for losing their job...what's the difference??
Hypothesis 1: the widespread reach of govt shutdowns. Many (most?) people, myself included, know someone affected.
Hypothesis 2: shutdowns are obvi political and this is arguably all thanks to The Great Orange One.
As a non-American I don't have a dog in this fight, but the big difference between layoff and shutdown is that after you get laid off you usually get severance and UI. Plus, you can go look for a new job the next day so you'll have some hope of getting paid again soonish. Additionally, if you're laid off, you don't have to show up for work, so you can nix your commuting and childcare expenses.
I really feel for all those who are working without pay right now. They don't get severance or UI, they can't realistically look for another job, and they still have all the expenses associated with their non-paying job. Seems like a pretty shit deal to me.
-
I confess, I was surprised to hear so many stories of people with middle-class-level government jobs who could not afford to miss one or two paychecks. But it's not the time for recriminations and mockery. I feel bad for them, especially those continuing to work on behalf of the public good.
-
I'm a fed, but at an agency that already received its appropriation, so I'm working and being paid. I really feel for my colleagues who are sitting at home unpaid while the work piles up at the office, or even worse- working and not being paid. Sure, the paycheck will come eventually, but there are a lot of people who have trouble missing even one paycheck. And for those who still have to go to work, they still have to pay for things like gas and child care- but without a paycheck. (And even people who are sitting at home but have kids in child care are probably still on the hook for the bill.)
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
If you've worked for the gov for 30 years, can't you retire with full benefits at that point? Not getting paid? Retire!
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
It is the longest shutdown, though, and with what end in sight? If she's been through 5 or 6 shutdowns by now, which she certainly would have in a 30 year government career, then maybe there are extenuating circumstances if she didn't have problems in the past, or maybe she is projecting her concerns forward if this drags on. I think I would have a bigger emergency fund personally, but things happen where you need to dip into it and build it back up again, so although many of the stories we're hearing are people who probably don't have an emergency fund, I'm sure there are others like the one @Blonde Lawyer shared. I'm most upset about the stories where people have just gotten a job or promotion and are looking to get ahead and build up savings (thinking of a specific one I read about a new TSA agent) who aren't there yet.
I work for a contractor and my specific contract is funded and unaffected, but I have colleagues who are not as fortunate. The whole thing makes me ill when I think about people working without pay that aren't allowed to find other employment, and people who are unable to work or obtain back pay. I have a friend whose husband is border patrol, required to work without pay. He would rather have his paycheck, additional manpower, and advanced technology than a fucking wall where there isn't one already...
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
If you've worked for the gov for 30 years, can't you retire with full benefits at that point? Not getting paid? Retire!
Are those checks going out right now?
-
I work for an agency that is a government contractor. We can't get our monthly funds with the shutdown. If we close our doors and stop working, we can't then bill the government toget our paychecks unlike the federal workers, so we are going to have to work and keep the doors open, but without paychecks if this continues much longer and our cash runs out. We will ultimately get paid whenever it ends, but the large paycheck will screw up tax withholding rates, etc.
NOAA is down the road from us and they are closed. There are many restaurants and other businesses that depend on those federal workers going there for lunch. They are just dead right now.
So, the impact ultimately will be felt by the non-government workers/contractors and businesses that depend on large labs and facilities. Unfortunately, they won't get back pay.
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
If you've worked for the gov for 30 years, can't you retire with full benefits at that point? Not getting paid? Retire!
Even when the gov't is up and running, processing retirement paperwork and beginning to receive a pension check typically takes several months. People usually begin the process 3-6 months out from their projected DoR.
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
If you've worked for the gov for 30 years, can't you retire with full benefits at that point? Not getting paid? Retire!
Even when the gov't is up and running, processing retirement paperwork and beginning to receive a pension check typically takes several months. People usually begin the process 3-6 months out from their projected DoR.
I didn't mean it was an instant solution to a cash flow problem, I meant if I had earned a full pension and benefits and suddenly my job decided to stop paying me, I'd retire from that job right away because fuck them.
I didn't mean it would immediately start the money tap flowing again.
-
I'm a fed, but at an agency that already received its appropriation, so I'm working and being paid. I really feel for my colleagues who are sitting at home unpaid while the work piles up at the office, or even worse- working and not being paid. Sure, the paycheck will come eventually, but there are a lot of people who have trouble missing even one paycheck. And for those who still have to go to work, they still have to pay for things like gas and child care- but without a paycheck. (And even people who are sitting at home but have kids in child care are probably still on the hook for the bill.)
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
The bolded - there are many who are working unpaid, or furloughed, that cannot do (/cannot be approved for) other work and still have to pay for daycare. Even a financially responsible employee with an ER fund probably doesn't really anticipate a layoff that includes full daycare expenses and the inability to work or look for work.
I don't judge people in this situation because, the paycheck-to-paycheck issue aside, most of us have been financially vulnerable at some point in life. It's very unsettling to watch this play out in people's lives.
-
I don't know if anyone here listens to Radical Personal Finance (Josh is both religious and conservative, so probably not), but he did an episode loosely tied to the government shutdown recently. It definitely involved some face-punching by pointing out the fact that anyone who has worked a full-time job for more than a year should have an emergency fund and therefore has no excuse.
I wasn't a huge fan of his method, since people tend to shut down when called stupid (even if true). However, it is true that people have a larger overall problem of worrying about things they can't control and blaming others for things that are controllable (such as having an emergency fund in place).
-
I don't know if anyone here listens to Radical Personal Finance (Josh is both religious and conservative, so probably not), but he did an episode loosely tied to the government shutdown recently. It definitely involved some face-punching by pointing out the fact that anyone who has worked a full-time job for more than a year should have an emergency fund and therefore has no excuse.
I wasn't a huge fan of his method, since people tend to shut down when called stupid (even if true). However, it is true that people have a larger overall problem of worrying about things they can't control and blaming others for things that are controllable (such as having an emergency fund in place).
Now obviously it wouldn't cover EVERY person working for more than a year; but what if they just had a major medical expense that used up their emergency fund?
A huge number of Americans are in debt, even if it isn't consumer debt: student loans, medical expenses, etc; and have regular payments to make. Where is the money for this emergency fund coming from if they having to pay their rent/mortgage, their loan payments, maybe a car payment, kids daycare (you don't get a break on that when you stay home, if you take the kid out, you lose the spot when you go back to work), other living expenses.
I'm a saver, but I recognize I've had vast privilege in my life that allowed me to get started that way. The idea of an emergency fund is laughable to many people, as there is ALWAYS an emergency. (Heck- I seem to always have an emergency- something that needs money unexpectedly. I just have plenty to cover it. Including a lay-off once.)
Also, as I think someone pointed out, most people who lose their jobs no longer pay childcare expenses, or often qualify for unemployment. Neither of these are true here. Yes, they could go looking for other jobs, but that isn't instant at all. And they'd lose any seniority towards a pension they've built up.
Many government workers plan for shutdowns, but not of this magnitude. This length isn't normal, and it could go on for a long time. Trump wanted to bring the US government to a standstill and he has. Even better- he's managed to force thousands to work without pay.
-
(edited)
I am furloughed. I have savings but not enough for several paychecks.
The thing is that this is a black swan event for me. It was inconceivable until now.
My division is already lean and if needed we can downsize through attrition. Our work is a priority in this administration.
As long as I continue to perform well it is unlikely I would lose my job. In the worst case if they did RIFs (reductions in force) I have enough seniority that I would be unaffected.
I've been through shutdowns but never thought it could continue this long, with no end in sight and no sense of urgency. Forcing tens of thousands of workers back to their posts without pay is horrible. I never expected that either.
-
I've mentioned in other threads I'm a essential Fed working for an IOU in the shut down. In addition to normal living, if I get slated to travel I can't be reimbursed for travel expenses even those that occurred prior to the shut down. In addition to my paycheck the government owes me about $600 for travel expenses right now.
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
-
I do cringe a bit at some of the coverage in the media, though. For example, a radio interview of a very emotional woman who says she has worked for the government for 30 years and never had trouble paying a bill until now.... I mean, come on, if you have worked for the government for 30 years, this is your 5th or 6th shutdown!
If you've worked for the gov for 30 years, can't you retire with full benefits at that point? Not getting paid? Retire!
Well quite possibly, No you can't retire with full benefits. Assume hired after 1986 - then Probably Federal FERS retirement system. If they hired in at 20 yrs old and did 30 years they'd be 50 yrs old. Now actually you can leave/ retire from fed gov't service at 50 yrs age with i believe 30 years of service.
BUT you don't get an immediate annuity, and will have to wait for your "minimum retirement age -MRA" of approx 57 years old to get your first retirement paycheck. So, how to fill the gap of no income for 7 years ? Plus no health care help, no old plan portability, or employer health care subsidy if you leave before MRA.
Oh and no cost of living increase is building up during those 7 years either . So a youngish person would need a Large amount of money in 401K / IRA / etc. to make this scenario of --not getting paid = disgruntled = quit / retire = live off 30% of normal salary 7 years in the future, until Soc Sec kicks in at 62 yr old to add more $$.
*edited to correct FERS rules statement.
-
Roland, people may be vested in a pension, etc so may not be the best move for some people.
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
Sure, but they may lose a lot of benefits (pension) and would get no severance or unemployment.
And it's not like jobs are instantaneous.
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
Sure, but they may lose a lot of benefits (pension) and would get no severance or unemployment.
And it's not like jobs are instantaneous.
And if you are a member of the USCG you can't just up and leave, nor can you look for other employment.
Many Fed workers have to return to their jobs immediately if/when the shutdown ends. Other companies know this, so why would you hire and train someone who may have to quit later today or tomorrow after hiring them?
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
Sure, but they may lose a lot of benefits (pension) and would get no severance or unemployment.
And it's not like jobs are instantaneous.
And if you are a member of the USCG you can't just up and leave, nor can you look for other employment.
Many Fed workers have to return to their jobs immediately if/when the shutdown ends. Other companies know this, so why would you hire and train someone who may have to quit later today or tomorrow after hiring them?
We had a conference call with HR/the CFO office yesterday. I'm an essential employee I go to work, the people in HR that process changes in employment status are not. From an HR perspective I "can't quit" either. Although as not a military person I guess I could "desert" without criminal punishment.
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
Thanks for reassessing and understanding. I do have an emergency fund and I'm thankful, but yea I have a coworker who is sole income for a family of 5.... and was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer last fall. Suddenly instead of savings they have out of pocket max for copays, missed work, etc.
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
Sure, but they may lose a lot of benefits (pension) and would get no severance or unemployment.
And it's not like jobs are instantaneous.
And if you are a member of the USCG you can't just up and leave, nor can you look for other employment.
Many Fed workers have to return to their jobs immediately if/when the shutdown ends. Other companies know this, so why would you hire and train someone who may have to quit later today or tomorrow after hiring them?
Very good point about the military.
Also, I figure that federal employees who are finding other jobs would NOT return to their old job (hence the losing their pension). I completely agree with you, and think I posted earlier, that getting a part-time job is barely feasible unless you know someone personally looking for help, because like you said- no company will hire someone who will quit any moment.
Excellent point to the poster who mentioned HR can't process paperwork for people to quit anyway...
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
Thanks for reassessing and understanding. I do have an emergency fund and I'm thankful, but yea I have a coworker who is sole income for a family of 5.... and was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer last fall. Suddenly instead of savings they have out of pocket max for copays, missed work, etc.
Yes, even good planners who value emergency funds run into crunch periods where their cash flexibility is depleted. DH and I have had minimal debt and a 6 month minimum emergency fund for the past 18 years or so. However, if something like this shutdown had happened during 2008 we would have been rapidly screwed b/c of an extreme temporary cash crunch we experienced that lasted about a year. During that time, for reasons related to caring for parents, we in short order went from...
no debt except one small mortgage, a full 6 month emergency fund, and a flexible cash stream,
...to extra bills related to moving a parent cross country; a home equity loan used for a down payment on a second house; a loan for a second car (needed so that parent could have one of ours); a second mortgage (for the house for said parent); all the utilities and expenses being paid for parent, who had no income. We consumed our emergency fund during this time as well.
From 2008 to 2010, we were in 'panic mode' trying to pay off this new mountain of debt while simultaneously rebuilding our emergency fund and fund retirement accounts. We spent almost no fun money at all. It absolutely sucked and I was in a constant state of anxiety.
Now keep in mind that this happened to coincide with the Great Recession! My income is erratic (b/c I'm a private contractor), but DH is a federal scientist, so at the very least we knew we could count on his income during an otherwise chaotic period. But we were still often paycheck to paycheck during that period, not b/c of any lack of planning or stupid blowing of money. Just b/c Life Happens Sometimes. Had this kind of shutdown occurred then, we would have been in complete panic mode. We would have rapidly had to run up credit card debt (something we never do) or tap into retirement funds.
Ever since then, I've wanted a bigger emergency fund than conventional wisdom recommends. What if one of us had had a medical crisis during that time also? Or a car accident that totaled one of our cars (such as just happened a few months ago)? Or if I had not been able to get contracts to supplement his steady income stream (b/c it was a recession)?
Shit happens, and even for those of us who plan and save and generally are very responsible with money, there are times when we are all much closer to the brink than we like to think about.
I am so thankful this current shutdown is happening when we have more than a year's worth of slush funds available. I can't imagine what this would be like for us in 2008-2010, or when we were first starting out in the first few years post college.
-
The pension is another reason for not seeking other employment.
If I stay until minimum retirement age (MRA), my pension will be about 1/3 of my final salary. But if I leave before MRA, I will lose 5% of my pension for each year not served. In my case that would be 15%.
They call it the "golden handcuffs" for a reason.
-
Most of what the government does is not immediately apparent. 30 days isn't enough to notice. But eventually bridges fall, closed airports, no military, air unsafe to breathe, lack of clean water, no tax refunds, no social security payments, gas pumps that drastically short you on fills; these things would be noticed. As someone else said- the reason we aren't noticing vital services disappearing is people are being forced to work without pay. How long do you think that should continue?
Well said. And if the shutdown lasts much longer, problems are going to start stacking up. Here's one I didn't see mentioned yet: federal courts will start shutting down (https://news.wttw.com/2019/01/10/federal-courts-may-soon-feel-impact-government-shutdown), which means that if you have cause for a lawsuit, you won't be able to get justice.
Should the shutdown last beyond Jan. 18, the court will be forced to operate under the Anti-Deficiency Act, which allows only “essential work” to continue. That means existing criminal and civil trials will continue, but jurors will not be paid until the shutdown is over. And no new civil trials would begin.
And if it lasts a few weeks beyond that, people will stop receiving food stamps (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-affect-snap-food-stamps-wic-millions-could-face-severe-cuts-in-2019-funding-usda-2018-01-09/). That's a lot of people, including children, the elderly and single parents:
According to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 42 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2017. More than 68 percent of participants were in families with children, and more than 44 percent were in working families.
-
And if it lasts a few weeks beyond that, people will stop receiving food stamps (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-affect-snap-food-stamps-wic-millions-could-face-severe-cuts-in-2019-funding-usda-2018-01-09/). That's a lot of people, including children, the elderly and single parents:
According to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 42 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2017. More than 68 percent of participants were in families with children, and more than 44 percent were in working families.
So, pretty much a Republican wet dream then right? Finally, getting rid of the moocher class. They can pull themselves up by eating their own boot straps or die trying. Amirite guys? :P
-
Most of what the government does is not immediately apparent. 30 days isn't enough to notice. But eventually bridges fall, closed airports, no military, air unsafe to breathe, lack of clean water, no tax refunds, no social security payments, gas pumps that drastically short you on fills; these things would be noticed. As someone else said- the reason we aren't noticing vital services disappearing is people are being forced to work without pay. How long do you think that should continue?
Well said. And if the shutdown lasts much longer, problems are going to start stacking up. Here's one I didn't see mentioned yet: federal courts will start shutting down (https://news.wttw.com/2019/01/10/federal-courts-may-soon-feel-impact-government-shutdown), which means that if you have cause for a lawsuit, you won't be able to get justice.
I was just sent the paperwork for an injury to a random person caused by the property of my agency. I can do nothing with this new paperwork because while I am working the person in DC I need to send this paperwork to in order to start the negotiating process is not. (Injury expense is about $10,000 injured person is asking for $450,000 though he lawyer.)
-
And if it lasts a few weeks beyond that, people will stop receiving food stamps (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-affect-snap-food-stamps-wic-millions-could-face-severe-cuts-in-2019-funding-usda-2018-01-09/). That's a lot of people, including children, the elderly and single parents:
According to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 42 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2017. More than 68 percent of participants were in families with children, and more than 44 percent were in working families.
So, pretty much a Republican wet dream then right? Finally, getting rid of the moocher class. They can pull themselves up by eating their own boot straps or die trying. Amirite guys? :P
"But he not hurting the ones he NEEDS to hurt", as quoted from a supporter of his. I feel sorry for the ones who didn't ask for this and yes Stv there will be those who will be happy that happens, but I have to wonder how his supporters who might get SNAP are gonna feel if/when it's cut off.
It's okay when it happens to those people, but I bet there will be some serious bitching when it hits them. And I won't feel sorry for them either.
-
One more side effect is that the Section 8 program will send out the payments for February, but if the shutdown continues, March payments will be withheld. Tenants could be affected if their Landlord attempts eviction, Landlords will be affected b/c they will have to either go into their own pocket to make mortgage, tax, utility, etc., payments, or if they can't cover the gap, then they will run the risk of default. Not to mention the cost of less money flowing into the economy on other purchases, lots of consequences far beyond some delayed rent checks.
I have a few tenants on Sec 8. I can only imagine the stress they will feel once we get into February if this shutdown continues. I won't evict them, and I won't charge late fees either, unless they also don't pay their portion. My other rentals will cover the gap until things are rectified, but during that time, I won't be spending on anything but vital repairs.
-
One more side effect is that the Section 8 program will send out the payments for February, but if the shutdown continues, March payments will be withheld. Tenants could be affected if their Landlord attempts eviction, Landlords will be affected b/c they will have to either go into their own pocket to make mortgage, tax, utility, etc., payments, or if they can't cover the gap, then they will run the risk of default. Not to mention the cost of less money flowing into the economy on other purchases, lots of consequences far beyond some delayed rent checks.
I have a few tenants on Sec 8. I can only imagine the stress they will feel once we get into February if this shutdown continues. I won't evict them, and I won't charge late fees either, unless they also don't pay their portion. My other rentals will cover the gap until things are rectified, but during that time, I won't be spending on anything but vital repairs.
Is eviction of section 8 something state courts can do? Or since it is a federal program, does it go through that system? (If it's federal- at least there won't be anyone to process the eviction. But yeah, the landlord is going to get screwed...)
-
One more side effect is that the Section 8 program will send out the payments for February, but if the shutdown continues, March payments will be withheld. Tenants could be affected if their Landlord attempts eviction, Landlords will be affected b/c they will have to either go into their own pocket to make mortgage, tax, utility, etc., payments, or if they can't cover the gap, then they will run the risk of default. Not to mention the cost of less money flowing into the economy on other purchases, lots of consequences far beyond some delayed rent checks.
I have a few tenants on Sec 8. I can only imagine the stress they will feel once we get into February if this shutdown continues. I won't evict them, and I won't charge late fees either, unless they also don't pay their portion. My other rentals will cover the gap until things are rectified, but during that time, I won't be spending on anything but vital repairs.
Is eviction of section 8 something state courts can do? Or since it is a federal program, does it go through that system? (If it's federal- at least there won't be anyone to process the eviction. But yeah, the landlord is going to get screwed...)
In the states where I do business, how they pay is largely irrelevant, and the eviction courts are state, not federal, so evictions should be able to proceed. However, I don't know how the judges will react to the (very valid) defense of the government shutdown being the cause of said eviction.
Some judges may choose to postpone the eviction. I once had a judge postpone an eviction until mid January, b/c he didn't want to evict the tenant during the holidays. It was early November, and the tenant hadn't paid rent for nearly 3 months by the time the court date arrived. I wasn't pleased with his generosity at my expense, not like my mortgage company was going to be so charitable! Cost of doing business in a tenant friendly state...
-
And if it lasts a few weeks beyond that, people will stop receiving food stamps (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-affect-snap-food-stamps-wic-millions-could-face-severe-cuts-in-2019-funding-usda-2018-01-09/). That's a lot of people, including children, the elderly and single parents:
According to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 42 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2017. More than 68 percent of participants were in families with children, and more than 44 percent were in working families.
So, pretty much a Republican wet dream then right? Finally, getting rid of the moocher class. They can pull themselves up by eating their own boot straps or die trying. Amirite guys? :P
"But he not hurting the ones he NEEDS to hurt", as quoted from a supporter of his. I feel sorry for the ones who didn't ask for this and yes Stv there will be those who will be happy that happens, but I have to wonder how his supporters who might get SNAP are gonna feel if/when it's cut off.
It's okay when it happens to those people, but I bet there will be some serious bitching when it hits them. And I won't feel sorry for them either.
When people start talking about a president "needing" to hurt certain groups of citizens, this starts to venture very quickly into autocrat / dictator territory.
If a tinpot Middle Eastern or African warlord started acting like this you guys would be all over it saying they must have the shit bombed out of them.
-
And if it lasts a few weeks beyond that, people will stop receiving food stamps (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-affect-snap-food-stamps-wic-millions-could-face-severe-cuts-in-2019-funding-usda-2018-01-09/). That's a lot of people, including children, the elderly and single parents:
According to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 42 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2017. More than 68 percent of participants were in families with children, and more than 44 percent were in working families.
So, pretty much a Republican wet dream then right? Finally, getting rid of the moocher class. They can pull themselves up by eating their own boot straps or die trying. Amirite guys? :P
"But he not hurting the ones he NEEDS to hurt", as quoted from a supporter of his. I feel sorry for the ones who didn't ask for this and yes Stv there will be those who will be happy that happens, but I have to wonder how his supporters who might get SNAP are gonna feel if/when it's cut off.
It's okay when it happens to those people, but I bet there will be some serious bitching when it hits them. And I won't feel sorry for them either.
When people start talking about a president "needing" to hurt certain groups of citizens, this starts to venture very quickly into autocrat / dictator territory.
If a tinpot Middle Eastern or African warlord started acting like this you guys would be all over it saying they must have the shit bombed out of them.
The quote is from the last paragraph of this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/florida-government-shutdown-marianna.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/florida-government-shutdown-marianna.html)
And yes, too many people in this country would be very happy with a dictator if it meant that they were in the favored class. It's scary for those of us who live here and saw the possibility of this 3 years ago when the giant orange toddler was running in the GOP primary.
-
They need to vote in the senate and reopen the government. McConnell is making a big mistake and people will remember this at election time. This is hurting so many people.
-
They need to vote in the senate and reopen the government. McConnell is making a big mistake and people will remember this at election time. This is hurting so many people.
Unfortunately, unless the shutdown were to occur practically on top of an election, past history shows that short term blame doesn't translate to election results. The GOP was blamed by most of the public during 2013 shutdown (I think Ted Cruz instigated that one), and they still had a terrific midterm in 2014. The news cycle is just too fast for any given event to stick in peoples' minds and override their party allegiance. However, I could see if this shutdown marked the beginning of a cascade of bad news (either relating to the Mueller investigation, or to the economy in general), that might make a difference in the next election.
-
When you are all talking about paying for daycare during the shutdown, keep in mind that many people use dependent care accounts and they cannot access their FSA or dependent care accounts at this time as there is no one there to process the paperwork. This is a disaster for so many people.
I also think it is going to have a major effect on our economy. Even the people that have slush funds are spending on just the bare necessities right now.
-
I also think it is going to have a major effect on our economy. Even the people that have slush funds are spending on just the bare necessities right now.
I have a decent slush fund but now I'm on bare necessities. I spent normally for the first week or so but this week I spent $20 on fresh produce and $60 on Ice Melt and that is it. Next week I will allow my grocery spend to go to $30 because I need to buy coffee otherwise my goal is $20 a week and eat the pantry.
-
When you are all talking about paying for daycare during the shutdown, keep in mind that many people use dependent care accounts and they cannot access their FSA or dependent care accounts at this time as there is no one there to process the paperwork. This is a disaster for so many people.
I also think it is going to have a major effect on our economy. Even the people that have slush funds are spending on just the bare necessities right now.
Which mean daycares are also not being paid... Which will eventually mean THEIR employees are not paid, and their mortgages, and utilities, and insurance.
A shutdown of this length, with no end in sight, has horrific ramifications. The senate should be ashamed they haven't even considered a bill sent to them.
-
In the private world when my wife's company ran into hard times and couldn't pay her, she left and found another job.
It is a possibility in the government world, right?
Yes, if you don't care about losing your pension, and aren't invested in going back to your job. Personally, I'm 4 years away from vesting,and have almost 10 years of building my reputation and specialized skills in a job that fits me almost perfectly. We are about two weeks away from sending a technical reference to editing that I've been working on for six years. I'm paid well due to the specialized skills unique to my agency's needs and would probably take a 50% pay cut to go to something that I'm not as good a fit for. Where I could normally get commensurate pay, those companies are probably not hiring now due to the shutdown.
So it's not as easy as just hopping out and finding a new job.
Not to mention, this could end any day. How long do you hang on, with the carrot of bring fully reimbursed for back pay. What if you quit one day too early?
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
Gooki - I really struggle with this. I'm 100% pro-union and pro-strike normally. It just gets really dicey when you have law enforcement personnel (the majority of Homeland Security that is shutdown), that have pledged oaths to protect people, fail to show up. I agree that it would finally get the public's attention though!
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
Gooki - I really struggle with this. I'm 100% pro-union and pro-strike normally. It just gets really dicey when you have law enforcement personnel (the majority of Homeland Security that is shutdown), that have pledged oaths to protect people, fail to show up. I agree that it would finally get the public's attention though!
I believe that it is also illegal for, say, the Coast Guard to strike (sworn oaths as service people).
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
Gooki - I really struggle with this. I'm 100% pro-union and pro-strike normally. It just gets really dicey when you have law enforcement personnel (the majority of Homeland Security that is shutdown), that have pledged oaths to protect people, fail to show up. I agree that it would finally get the public's attention though!
I believe that it is also illegal for, say, the Coast Guard to strike (sworn oaths as service people).
It's illegal for all US government employees to strike, per the Taft-Hartley act of 1947. Taft-Hartley also allows the President to intervene in strikes that create a national emergency, so entities such as TSA have a double whammy prohibiting any strike.
That being said, a government's laws are not natural laws of the universe. I prove the lack of natural law every time I successfully drive over the speed limit. However, if TSA workers strike, they'll by definition be doing it outside the auspices of their union, which is a bit like being the sole antelope that decides to look different from the herd.
I've got oh so many words about what life is currently like for AD Coast Guard, but right now silence is prudence.
-
Edit
I tried to start a discussion on "this is why we have emergency funds", but because unlike the majority of the wall of shame and comedy board, there is a statistical certainty at least one person is in a pinch due to circumstances beyond their control, rather than their own doing, I was instead a dick
Sorry
Thanks for reassessing and understanding. I do have an emergency fund and I'm thankful, but yea I have a coworker who is sole income for a family of 5.... and was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer last fall. Suddenly instead of savings they have out of pocket max for copays, missed work, etc.
Yes, even good planners who value emergency funds run into crunch periods where their cash flexibility is depleted. DH and I have had minimal debt and a 6 month minimum emergency fund for the past 18 years or so. However, if something like this shutdown had happened during 2008 we would have been rapidly screwed b/c of an extreme temporary cash crunch we experienced that lasted about a year. During that time, for reasons related to caring for parents, we in short order went from...
no debt except one small mortgage, a full 6 month emergency fund, and a flexible cash stream,
...to extra bills related to moving a parent cross country; a home equity loan used for a down payment on a second house; a loan for a second car (needed so that parent could have one of ours); a second mortgage (for the house for said parent); all the utilities and expenses being paid for parent, who had no income. We consumed our emergency fund during this time as well.
From 2008 to 2010, we were in 'panic mode' trying to pay off this new mountain of debt while simultaneously rebuilding our emergency fund and fund retirement accounts. We spent almost no fun money at all. It absolutely sucked and I was in a constant state of anxiety.
Now keep in mind that this happened to coincide with the Great Recession! My income is erratic (b/c I'm a private contractor), but DH is a federal scientist, so at the very least we knew we could count on his income during an otherwise chaotic period. But we were still often paycheck to paycheck during that period, not b/c of any lack of planning or stupid blowing of money. Just b/c Life Happens Sometimes. Had this kind of shutdown occurred then, we would have been in complete panic mode. We would have rapidly had to run up credit card debt (something we never do) or tap into retirement funds.
Ever since then, I've wanted a bigger emergency fund than conventional wisdom recommends. What if one of us had had a medical crisis during that time also? Or a car accident that totaled one of our cars (such as just happened a few months ago)? Or if I had not been able to get contracts to supplement his steady income stream (b/c it was a recession)?
Shit happens, and even for those of us who plan and save and generally are very responsible with money, there are times when we are all much closer to the brink than we like to think about.
I am so thankful this current shutdown is happening when we have more than a year's worth of slush funds available. I can't imagine what this would be like for us in 2008-2010, or when we were first starting out in the first few years post college.
I agree. This time last year, I was a little bummed that my agency was funded and we weren't getting some free time off. This year? I'd have had to make some hard decisions because 2018 was a hell of a year for us.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm non-essential, so I'm not going to work. Hard to strike when you're not allowed to go to work if you want to. I was pointing out why many federal employees are unlikely to quit, even after months of no pay. I work with several researchers, many of whom are eligible to retire, but they aren't going to just walk away from their life's work under these circumstances. That doesn't mean it's not a financial hardship, and that some might be forced to walk away eventually, or do something extreme to hang in there (draw equity out of their houses, etc.). AFAIK, there is no mechanism to get TSP loans during a shutdown (not something I'm considering, but I imagine others would).
My husband works for an agency that is funded, but the agency that processes his payroll is not funded, so we wonder if there will eventually be problems with his paychecks as well.
-
They say there are two types of countries: those where the government is afraid of the people and those where the people are afraid of the government. France is in the first category - street protests got Macron to back down on new taxes. In the U.S., government workers are afraid of losing their jobs if they strike illegally. Even protesting is risky since it may lead to an arrest record, or your managers may see you on video and retaliate. Federal workers have few rights, even the ones with unions.
-
They say there are two types of countries: those where the government is afraid of the people and those where the people are afraid of the government. France is in the first category - street protests got Macron to back down on new taxes. In the U.S., government workers are afraid of losing their jobs if they strike illegally. Even protesting is risky since it may lead to an arrest record, or your managers may see you on video and retaliate. Federal workers have few rights, even the ones with unions.
It's almost like easy access to guns doesn't make a government afraid of people at all. :P
-
Reagan fires all the striking air controllers and trump would fire anyone he could.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm non-essential, so I'm not going to work. Hard to strike when you're not allowed to go to work if you want to. I was pointing out why many federal employees are unlikely to quit, even after months of no pay. I work with several researchers, many of whom are eligible to retire, but they aren't going to just walk away from their life's work under these circumstances. That doesn't mean it's not a financial hardship, and that some might be forced to walk away eventually, or do something extreme to hang in there (draw equity out of their houses, etc.). AFAIK, there is no mechanism to get TSP loans during a shutdown (not something I'm considering, but I imagine others would).
My husband works for an agency that is funded, but the agency that processes his payroll is not funded, so we wonder if there will eventually be problems with his paychecks as well.
In case you need it, the FBI put out a shutdown guidance for employees that suggests there is a way to get TSP loans.
https://www.fbi.gov/about/commonly-asked-questions-for-government-shutdown
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm non-essential, so I'm not going to work. Hard to strike when you're not allowed to go to work if you want to. I was pointing out why many federal employees are unlikely to quit, even after months of no pay. I work with several researchers, many of whom are eligible to retire, but they aren't going to just walk away from their life's work under these circumstances. That doesn't mean it's not a financial hardship, and that some might be forced to walk away eventually, or do something extreme to hang in there (draw equity out of their houses, etc.). AFAIK, there is no mechanism to get TSP loans during a shutdown (not something I'm considering, but I imagine others would).
My husband works for an agency that is funded, but the agency that processes his payroll is not funded, so we wonder if there will eventually be problems with his paychecks as well.
In case you need it, the FBI put out a shutdown guidance for employees that suggests there is a way to get TSP loans.
https://www.fbi.gov/about/commonly-asked-questions-for-government-shutdown
Thanks, not something I'm planning on, but I did look into it out of curiosity this morning. It's possible to get a loan if you "believe" that you'll be back at work in 30 days, and able to start repaying in 60 days. Which is weird.
I also had another thought this morning - as I understand the bill that's been signed for our backpay, it's contingent upon passage of a spending bill. If we were brought back to work under a CR, it seems possible that we wouldn't see this pay until a 2020 spending bill is passed sometime well into that FY. So people could end up in debt for a long time, and paying a lot of interest as a result. The language is "when the lapse in appropriations" ends, which seems a little unclear, and could be interpreted to mean that a current spending bill must be in place.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
Gooki - I really struggle with this. I'm 100% pro-union and pro-strike normally. It just gets really dicey when you have law enforcement personnel (the majority of Homeland Security that is shutdown), that have pledged oaths to protect people, fail to show up. I agree that it would finally get the public's attention though!
I believe that it is also illegal for, say, the Coast Guard to strike (sworn oaths as service people).
It’s also illegal for your employer to fail to complete their end of the contract.
You can either work together to collectively force their hand, or you can keep taking it up the ass every other year.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm non-essential, so I'm not going to work. Hard to strike when you're not allowed to go to work if you want to. I was pointing out why many federal employees are unlikely to quit, even after months of no pay. I work with several researchers, many of whom are eligible to retire, but they aren't going to just walk away from their life's work under these circumstances. That doesn't mean it's not a financial hardship, and that some might be forced to walk away eventually, or do something extreme to hang in there (draw equity out of their houses, etc.). AFAIK, there is no mechanism to get TSP loans during a shutdown (not something I'm considering, but I imagine others would).
My husband works for an agency that is funded, but the agency that processes his payroll is not funded, so we wonder if there will eventually be problems with his paychecks as well.
Which is why I said collectively. If you and the majority of other federal employees no longer want to be treated this way, then you’ll have to start working together on a plan.
-
For clarification purposes: nobody really expects politicians to be leaders. They're professional office-seekers who devote most of their time to managing their public image and to getting ready for the next election. Doing the job they've been elected to do isn't mandatory, and there are no real consequences to not doing it.
The winner, in politics, is the person who puts the most people at risk but still gets away with it. Think of it like a school bus driver who is rewarded for getting as near as possible to the edge of the cliff (be it nuclear war, government shutdown, ecological collapse, or whatever) without actually going over it. The end result is school bus drivers who drive as quickly as possible toward the nearest cliff, hoping to brake at the last second. The bigger the drama, the more famous the politician. The more famous the politician, the more readily he or she can obtain grease from various special interest groups. Some pretend that their sudden wealth comes from book sales or bookings on the duckspeaker circuit. Others pretend they were always wealthy and they just don't know how they came by all the extras they now enjoy.
I'd like to change the budgeting process. Suppose legislation requires Congress, the Senate, and the President to pass a budget on or before a specific deadline each year. This will be well before the year end when the money runs out. Up to that point, they can grandstand and feint all they like, and they can be as hardcore and polarized as they wanna be. But if they are unwilling to work together well enough to pass a budget of some kind, then every one of them loses his or her job and will be replaced by the runner-up, which may be of a different party. If the replacements are unable or unwilling to pass a budget, then the budget for the year will automatically be whatever last year's budget was, minus any one-year windfalls and riders from the previous year that have been funded.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm essential. There is a reason why my job is categorized as essential. If I don't show up for work people can die. It's not as easy as just not "going into work."
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm essential. There is a reason why my job is categorized as essential. If I don't show up for work people can die. It's not as easy as just not "going into work."
Exactly. Sadly, politicians know this.
I greatly fear that they're going to continue to play their games and to behave irresponsibly until they, personally, experience consequences. Consequences for us little people just aren't a blip on their radar screens.
-
Then don't quit.
If you want to send a message that you won't tolerate this behavior by your leaders, then collectively all federal employees should strike (refuse to turn up to work), even essential staff.
I'm essential. There is a reason why my job is categorized as essential. If I don't show up for work people can die. It's not as easy as just not "going into work."
Exactly. Sadly, politicians know this.
I greatly fear that they're going to continue to play their games and to behave irresponsibly until they, personally, experience consequences. Consequences for us little people just aren't a blip on their radar screens.
Isnt it also illegal for federal government workers to strike in the USA?
Federal employees are governed chiefly by the Federal Service Labor Management Relations Act of 1978. That statute prohibits strikes by federal workers (https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-faa-workers-strike-end-shutdown/story?id=60540070)
-
The pension is another reason for not seeking other employment.
If I stay until minimum retirement age (MRA), my pension will be about 1/3 of my final salary. But if I leave before MRA, I will lose 5% of my pension for each year not served. In my case that would be 15%.
They call it the "golden handcuffs" for a reason.
So this is only partially true. I'm assuming you're a FERS federal employee. Yes, if you leave early *and try to claim the pension immediately* you loose 5% for each year BUT if you leave early and do a 'deferred retirement' and do not claim your pension until your MRA you don't loose anything. (although you don't gain the additional 1% for the intervening years since they are not years of service)