Opinion War Room Government Shutdown over/under predictions

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Democrats going to sue Trump so that the troops don’t get paid. Bold strategy. This is going to happen as Trump will be reaching his all time approval rating lol

Pay has already been issued. Any legal action would be to set future precedents.

 

[HereticBD]

Pay has already been issued. Any legal action would be to set future precedents.

Do you think it would be a smart fight for the Dems to take up?

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Do you think it would be a smart fight for the Dems to take up?

Do you think Reps or Dems ever care about doing the smart thing?

 

[cottagecheesefan]

Pay has already been issued. Any legal action would be to set future precedents.

Well if it goes in through next paycheck, democrats may try to stop it, which I find a poor move politically for them.

Especially when the rumors are that they want to keep everything shut down at least for the purpose of one of these silly “no kings protests”. The previous of these protests being laughed at. Bunch of dorky, white and affluent boomers.

 

[HereticBD]

Do you think Reps or Dems ever care about doing the smart thing?

Not an answer. In this instance, where Republicans are getting money to troops during a shutdown, do you think it would be smart for the Dems to try and stop that?

 

[BFoe]

I’m sure they haven’t. It obviously depends on the RIF, but in bloated environments, it will absolutely increase production.

No, I think I was correct. Here’s an analysis by the budget lab at Yale.

https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/revenue-and-distributional-effects-irs-funding#:~:text=If%20the%20IRS%20shrinks%20by,the%2010%2Dyear%20budget%20window.

Regarding the Inflation Reduction Act funding which Republicans have slashed and want to keep slashing:

“The Budget Lab estimates that the expansion of funding ($80 billion) for the IRS in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) would have led to a net revenue increase of $637 billion over the full 10-year budget window.”
Conversely, proposed cuts from the Trump Admin would have the opposite effect. Obviously what the exact RIFs are do matter, as you said.

“We consider two different RIFs:

1. First, as of February 20, 2025, the IRS has announced around 7,000 layoffs, more than 5,000 of whom reportedly worked in compliance efforts.
2. Second, last week, reports suggested that the Trump Administration was pushing to slash the IRS workforce in half. We assume that these cuts come from across the agency’s functions and are on top of the initial reduction in force, such that if these changes are implemented, the IRS workforce will total around 50,000, down from around 100,000 in January.

Table 2 reports our estimates. We conclude that the aggregate effect of these two RIFs would decrease gross tax collections by about $395 billion over the course of the next decade, which includes a rough estimate of the delays to technology improvements and enhancements that would be the consequence of halving the agency’s workforce.”

So sure, it definitely matters how much we’re cutting, and whom exactly and what role they perform. But could we cut a full 1/4 of the IRS force in one fell swoop and not only not feel it, but get increased productivity per resource? Nah.

Your position is that there is no bloat in the IRS?

Where are you getting that from? I’m sure there’s some. My position is that any substantial cuts require a solid analysis first, should be carefully thought out, and phased in gradually so as not to cause adverse effects but also to not lay off a whole bunch of people at once and send them all to the unemployment line like a big jerk.

We just saw DOGE do the exact opposite of that and not only did they not save us much, it looks like they probably cost us money.

 

[Rob Battisti]

No, I think I was correct. Here’s an analysis by the budget lab at Yale.

https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/revenue-and-distributional-effects-irs-funding#:~:text=If%20the%20IRS%20shrinks%20by,the%2010%2Dyear%20budget%20window.

Regarding the Inflation Reduction Act funding which Republicans have slashed and want to keep slashing:

“The Budget Lab estimates that the expansion of funding ($80 billion) for the IRS in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) would have led to a net revenue increase of $637 billion over the full 10-year budget window.”
Conversely, proposed cuts from the Trump Admin would have the opposite effect. Obviously what the exact RIFs are do matter, as you said.

“We consider two different RIFs:

1. First, as of February 20, 2025, the IRS has announced around 7,000 layoffs, more than 5,000 of whom reportedly worked in compliance efforts.
2. Second, last week, reports suggested that the Trump Administration was pushing to slash the IRS workforce in half. We assume that these cuts come from across the agency’s functions and are on top of the initial reduction in force, such that if these changes are implemented, the IRS workforce will total around 50,000, down from around 100,000 in January.

Table 2 reports our estimates. We conclude that the aggregate effect of these two RIFs would decrease gross tax collections by about $395 billion over the course of the next decade, which includes a rough estimate of the delays to technology improvements and enhancements that would be the consequence of halving the agency’s workforce.”

So sure, it definitely matters how much we’re cutting, and whom exactly and what role they perform. But could we cut a full 1/4 of the IRS force in one fell swoop and not only not feel it, but get increased productivity per resource? Nah.


Where are you getting that from? I’m sure there’s some. My position is that any substantial cuts require a solid analysis first, should be carefully thought out, and phased in gradually so as not to cause adverse effects but also to not lay off a whole bunch of people at once and send them all to the unemployment line like a big jerk.

We just saw DOGE do the exact opposite of that and not only did they not save us much, it looks like they probably cost us money.

I can also show studies showing the opposite.

If you wish I can post them here.

You’re overestimating the necessity for thorough review to make precision cuts in the IRS. You could literally go to each team, ask for their bottom 10% and not feel a thing.

 

[syct23]

Paying the troops in front of the civilians was the wrong thing to do..

 

[Andy Capp]

Of all of the things to harp on AI about these days.....its potential for cheap monetary regulation and oversight on taxation is astounding. While this would probably eliminate a lot of current bodied jobs, on the whole it would alleviate the financial limitations and a whole host of other intangibles and costs.

You'd still need human final review in a more streamlined and efficient way, but the majority of most tax leg work could be accomplished by computers. And it should be.

Of course, you know damn well that'll be one of the last places it gets used haha

I'm not harping about AI eventually replacing people there. I don't think it's up to the task yet but it no doubt will be some years down the road. I'm talking about the idea of putting the cart before the horse by cutting staff now and then filling shortfall later w/ AI tools that may not yet be ready for prime time.

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Not an answer.

It is, in fact, an answer lol. Basic reading comprehension would indicate that the statements was quite self explanatory. In this, and any other instance, I do not considered what either party does to be smart. I do not think anything either party is actively doing or planning to do is smart. They're operating the government like a bunch of punch drunk toddlers throwing a fit.

The Dems and Reps will always make the dumbest choices available to them.

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Well if it goes in through next paycheck, democrats may try to stop it, which I find a poor move politically for them.

I think it was only meant to cover this one but I may be wrong. I'd have to sit down and do the math to be sure. And as for fighting it being a poor move, yeah but it really doesn't matter. Democrats and Republicans don't gain support by doing smart things that help people. They win support by being support morons who only operate out of spite.

Especially when the rumors are that they want to keep everything shut down at least for the purpose of one of these silly “no kings protests”. The previous of these protests being laughed at. Bunch of dorky, white and affluent boomers.

Haven't heard anything about that. Honestly, I've run very low on fucks to give these days. I'm deeply disappointed and exhausted with the state of the country atm.

 

[HereticBD]

It is, in fact, an answer lol.

No, it wasn't. It was a "both sides" deflection, in order to avoid answering the actual question.

Basic reading comprehension would indicate that the statements was quite self explanatory. In this, and any other instance, I do not considered what either party does to be smart.

But based on your prior posts, we know that's bullshit. Don't play "The Conveniently Timed Enlightened Centrist" crap, all because you can't say that Democrats trying to stop paying the military would be an impossibly stupid move.

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

No, it wasn't.

I understand reading is difficult for you.

It was a "both sides" deflection, in order to avoid answering the actual question.

Except the actual question was answered by stating that they never do the smart thing. Again, reading can be difficult for some.

But based on your prior posts, we know that's bullshit.

My previous posts of consistently hating both major parties and advocating for 3rd party and moderate candidates to take the majority?

Don't play "The Conveniently Timed Enlightened Centrist" crap

Yes, the convenient timing of the last 20 something years of my life lol.

you can't say that Democrats trying to stop paying the military would be an impossibly stupid move.

You mean the thing I've said several times now?

Hey bud, how about you wipe the foam frothing from your mouth and come back to reality. Not everyone is a blind follower of partisan bullshit like you are.

Dems are stupid if they push back on this before the shutdown is over. Republicans are stupid for refusing to compromise at all with Dems on healthcare so that we can end this bullshit. Trump was stupid for circumventing legal means to get troops payed. We elected nothing but idiots so all we will get from here on out are idiotic decisions.

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

While I'm glad I'll be getting payed tomorrow, I'd much rather congress stop acting like stubborn children and find a middle ground so that civilian employees can get back to work as well. I'm covering down on 5 people's jobs that are not remotely under my umbrella at the moment and I know others have it worse. This shit is not sustainable

 

[BFoe]

I can also show studies showing the opposite.

If you wish I can post them here.

You’re overestimating the necessity for thorough review to make precision cuts in the IRS. You could literally go to each team, ask for their bottom 10% and not feel a thing.

How many people or what percentage would that be? You earlier advocated for eliminating 1/4 of that workforce, and it seems clear that a cut of that size is not beneficial. The study I linked has within it mentions or links to several other analyses, which all show the same thing.

Obviously you replied so quickly that you couldn’t have read that entire thing let along the other analyses mentioned. You’re basically just saying “Yes we can too do that” without actually addressing any of the points i made. It seems pretty clear to me that the cuts you’re advocating for are too steep and we wouldn’t come out ahead. We’d lose out on collecting a ton of revenue.
Meanwhile, the 80 billion funding expansion that we allocated, which Trump/GOP is slashing, would’ve led to a net increase of 637 billion dollars over 10 years.

 

[N13]

Day 14 and counting, 8th attempt has failed.

 

[N13]

@cottagecheesefan

One of the Democrat goals is to strangle federal law enforcement with the shutdown.

Maybe Trump will use the tariff money to keep the payroll going.

 

[SurferH2O]

The Republicans have a point....

 

[N13]

The Republicans have a point....

I'm not in favor of using tax money to study flying transgender monkey species in India.

 

[SurferH2O]

I'm not in favor of using tax money to study flying transgender monkey species in India.

This ridiculous crap has to end. American taxpayers' money should benefit Americans. People can create all the private charities they want, now, excuse me while I send in money so an old Jewish lady in Ukraine can eat.