Washington Post: What a shutdown would look like
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/02/what_might_a_government_shutdo_1.html
I see two key takaways in that. First, veterans, if anybody, should be the very last to be denied payments. Second, it appears that Obama by his own words, is saying SS payments will not go out. It is likely a typical demonrat fear-mongering technique. He, his Administration, still has to carry through with the threat, or the fear-mongering is empty, right? So who's fault is it really if SS checks do not go out during a shutdown? It should be Obama's! we all know the MFM and leftnut pol's they carry tainted water for will stick to the party line that it is all the fault of the eeeevil wepubwican's! But people are tired of Obama's lies and grotesque spending...I don't think that pig will fly anymore...with or without lipstick!
Even if non-essential workers wanted to work without pay, they could face fines of up to $5,000 or up to two years in prison for violating a federal law that prohibits agencies from accepting volunteer labor.
I did not know that ^. Interesting. It appears the main incentive is to get as many on the payroll as possible.
So how might it work this time? It obviously won't be quite the same, said Stan Collander, a longtime budget analyst.
"Instead of checks being mailed, they're now transferred electronically.
It appears SS checks
will go out, along with the vast number of other transfer payments. So much for Duh Wun's scare-mongering.
But you've also got other things that didn't exist before like Homeland Security," he said. "There would have to be some reevaluation from last time. Those are big policy decisions. The next level down is to tell every agency to start preparing for a shutdown. Who gets to come in, who doesn't? What additional help do you need for security and computer systems?"
Stores and restaurants near federal buildings relying on daytime foot traffic would suffer and Metrorail revenues would plummet from lower ridership. It would be as if the movie industry shut down Hollywood, or if the auto industry temporarily closed shop in Detroit.
Government contracting firms are already mobilizing and preparing for potential disruptions, according to Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, which represents hundreds of mid-sized contracting firms.
"We want our folks to be as prepared as possible," Soloway said. "That doesn't mean it's going to happen, but it's not outside the realm of possibility either, so we can't ignore it."
Calculating the potential savings from a shutdown are difficult, primarily because agencies historically pay back workers for time lost and might spend more to compensate for lost productivity, according to Post reports from the period.
Cities and states relying on federal funds would also have to spend unavailable cash. During the Nov. 1995 shutdown, the District of Columbia saved about $1.2 million daily by keeping some offices closed, but concurrently spent $4.4 million to cover the salaries of 26,000 employees normally paid with federal funds. At the same time, Maryland's state government spent $1.4 million a day to cover the salaries of 9,680 state workers also paid with federal dollars.
This, as much as any other fact, goes to show how too-big the federal government is now, if so much economic activity - and wellbeing - depends on it conducting business-as-usual.
One last thing: sometime last week I spotted an interesting article stating the bulk of the Federal budget is spent on transfer payments, that in the main, the Feds are in the check-mailing business, a cursory search for which didn't turn it up, however in 2006, according to the Cato Institute,
fully 60% of the budget goes to such.
That's pay/benefits for Fed workers, Veterans, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies,
Earned Income Tax Credits (that is, you didn't make enough to pay Federal income tax, and since you didn't, here's some money), aid to States' governments, and, of course, let us not forget grants to "non-profits".
UFB.