772
And with only one week for people to prepare. Smooth.
Thing is, it's gonna hit the rural MAGA folks the hardest.
There's a part of me that wants to go "I told you so.." which is expected..
But the more cunning part of me wants to leverage their hunger, dismay and rage and work to aim it squarely against Trump and the entire MAGA movement.
load more comments
(17 replies)
Not an American but if the government shutsdown and they are cancelling programs, shouldn't you not have to pay taxes for that time period?
Most working people have their estimated taxes deducted from their pay before they receive it. They don't have an option to not pay.
Well, that one congressional district that has their congress person being kept out should definitely not have to pay because that would be a taxation when they have no representation.
Also, several congresspeople have said that they "don't represent the Democrats" in their districts. I think that, too, should immediately exempt those residents from taxes.
You can fill out a form and send it to your HR/payroll department to adjust your withholdings at anytime, and they are supposed to do so no questions asked.
The employee not paying their income tax does not actually have an adverse impact on the employer, so they don't care. Of course, the employee still has the legal obligation to pay; but breaking tax law is pretty inherent with tax protest.
load more comments
(5 replies)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
load more comments
(1 replies)
Can any Americans explain to me, a Canadian, how it makes sense for essential services like food benefits to be suspended just because your government can't get their shit together?
Like, genuine question here; how is this is a good system? How does your country benefit from things being designed this way? I'm not saying we don't ever have political deadlock in Canada, we most certainly do, but even as someone who gets half my household income from the military, I've never had to worry about a missed paycheck just because politicians are being stupid. We have failsafes for that. Why don't you?
In a sensible country, the government would continue to spend at the levels of the previous budget in the event of a delay in negotiating the renewed budget. It makes no sense. There are no benefits. Please do what you did in 1814 again we need it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
So, many many years ago, there was a system where when a bill was passed, that meant it got funded. Simple and sweet. Actually it wasn't that sweet, because Nixon was refusing to spend money that the law required the U.S. government to spend, similar to what Trump is doing today.
The current system is generally based on the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. There have been many small and large changes since, but the structure basically goes back to that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So fun fact, the shutdowns came from a legal opinion of the AG in the 80s, and they didn't even adhere to that decision until a decade later, except for the first time. Reagan wanted the government shutdown to force Congress hands to cut more then they wanted to.
Then for the rest of the 80s and some 90s everybody ignored that AG decision until 1995 when Newt Gingrich (man that fuck was bad for the country) got into a fight with Clinton over spending and then all of the sudden the AG opinion mattered again.
load more comments
(12 replies)
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2025
772 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26165 readers
3703 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS