US Government faces partial shutdown

ruggedtoast

Fiona Bruce. More woman than most of the man children on this forum could handle

grizzly1911

thor wrote: »

I think the problem with FB is that she thinks she is more attractive than she actually is. Don't get me wrong, she is fairly pretty BUT she is no Susana Reid!

Yes I keep meaning to catch Susana on that dancing thing but whilst the temptation is great I really can't stand that programme.

Carrie Gracie isn't bad either -intelligent too

Loughton_Monkey

thor wrote: »

I think the problem with FB is that she thinks she is more attractive than she actually is. Don't get me wrong, she is fairly pretty BUT she is no Susana Reid!

For a self-admitted raging feminist, she does rather too much 'posing' and posturing.

Pictures of her should be banned from this forum.

ruggedtoast

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

For a self-admitted raging feminist, she does rather too much 'posing' and posturing.

Pictures of her should be banned from this forum.

It's possible to be feminist, and feminine, believe it or not.

Generali

Unintended consequence of the shutdown #1:

The Department of Agriculture produces indicative prices for lots of 'soft commodities' (farm produce). This gives guidance to farmers when dealing with the handful of processors across the US. The reason? As there are many farmers but few food processors, the processors tend to know a lot more about supply and demand and can use this information to their advantage in price negotiation.

However, the DoA is a 'non-essential function' so is closed. That means farmers have no indicative prices and so will (probably) get screwed over by buyers. Maybe a good time to buy shares in meat processing companies.

vivatifosi

Unintended consequene of the shutdown #2:

Brevard County is where Kennedy Space Centre is located. Anyone who has been there during elections will know it is very Republican.

The area is already on a downer: each time one space program ends and another starts, there are massive layoffs and unemployment. This happened recently when the Space Shuttle program ended. So already you had a depressed job market, depressed housing market and empty commercial units.

Now, given the dependence on government jobs, huge swathes of the economy are furloughed. Oh well, not too bad... They've still got tourism. Except that some of that tourism lays within the Cape Canaveral national park. Plus their biggest tourist attraction: the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex (privately run) is mostly off bounds as it buses tourists behind the scenes to see inside NASA and now can't, so why bother visiting?

Republicans hurting Republians... Surely not an intended consequence.

Unintended Consequence of the shutdown #3:

Defence contractor United Technologies, a private company for whom about 20% of turnover is represented by the US government, may have to lay off 5000 of its own workers if the furlough continues for long enough.

2000 of its employees will be furloughed next Monday at subsidiary Pratt and Witney:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/02/utx-may-furlough-5k-workers-due-to-govt-shutdown/2912733/

A different article states that other major contractors such as Bell Helicopter and Lockheed Martin are also considering the impact.

A lot of the above are also based in Brevard County. Lockheed Martin is a very large defence contractor.


I also feel sorry for the small businesses operating in or adjacent to National Parks.
Thanks for looking into the unintended consequences angle Gen. It's an interesting way of looking at things.

Generali

You're welcome viva.

#4.

The jobs report, probably the most looked at piece of IS economic data right now, isn't going to be released today.

michaels

One poster on here predicted the 2013 boom off the back of US demand. Perhaps he could advise us what personal steps we could take to cover ourselves in the event of a US default?

And I'm so hoping the answer isn't precious metals and bitcoins

grizzly1911

Generali wrote: »

As there are many farmers but few food processors, the processors tend to know a lot more about supply and demand and can use this information to their advantage in price negotiation.

So what happened to free markets having the knowledge to exploit their sector efficiently if we have a "relative" few conglomerates dictating terms?

Won't those conglomerates be working in the best interests of the consumers and the country?

If they need government intervention to make the process work it would indicate the "conglomerates" are controlling the market for their own interests.

wotsthat

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Won't those conglomerates be working in the best interests of the consumers and the country?

They should be maximising profits. Nothing unethical about having a better market knowledge than your suppliers.

The net effect on the consumer is probably zero but profits will be transferred from farmer to processor.