Minnesotta Runs Out of Cash & Government Starts to Shut Down
Discussion
Just got back from the USA and while in Minneapolis they reported that extra spending in the budget was not agreed between Republicans and Democrats, this has meant there's no cash to pay Government workers so non-essential services have started to shut down.
Biggest gripe was all National Parks were shutting and this being their July 4th weekend but that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Looks like it's going to effect 36,000 workers in total
Story here:
www.myfoxtwincities.com/dpp/news/politics/minnesot...
Biggest gripe was all National Parks were shutting and this being their July 4th weekend but that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Looks like it's going to effect 36,000 workers in total

Story here:
www.myfoxtwincities.com/dpp/news/politics/minnesot...
Regiment said:
turbobloke said:
So there's a Democrat Governor in a State with restrictions on motorists' freedoms wanting to soak the hardworking classes to solve a budget problem. He'd do well over here under Wallace Gump. Particularly as a (USA version) fat wallet socialist.
Next Labour leader?
The real story is about Minnesota residents and the impact on them but this is PH after all so hopefully we can continue in this vein for a while yet.

turbobloke said:
So there's a Democrat Governor in a State with restrictions on motorists' freedoms wanting to soak the hardworking classes to solve a budget problem. He'd do well over here under Wallace Gump. Particularly as a (USA version) fat wallet socialist.
There are more republicans in their house than DFL's. So how did it get to this situation?For me it just shows what happens when the government does run out of money e.g. jobs are laid off. That they can do it with minimal payout is just mind boggling.
Imagine if it happened in the UK?
If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, we've overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
Imagine if it happened in the UK?
If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, we've overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
ChiChoAndy said:
turbobloke said:
So there's a Democrat Governor in a State with restrictions on motorists' freedoms wanting to soak the hardworking classes to solve a budget problem. He'd do well over here under Wallace Gump. Particularly as a (USA version) fat wallet socialist.
There are more republicans in their house that DFL'sSo a 'majority' of one Democrat prevails.
robm3 said:
Imagine if it happened in the UK?
If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, Labour overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
As long as he said it right!If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, Labour overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
And yes, I imagine teachers would strike, union dinosaurs would threaten an autumn of discontent, that kind of thing, maybe worse.
turbobloke said:
robm3 said:
Imagine if it happened in the UK?
If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, Labour overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
As long as he said it right!If next week Cameron says "We haven't agreed a budget, Labour overspent and so as of next month 30,000 workers will be laid off, oh with minimal pay too"
Just imagine?
And yes, I imagine teachers would strike, union dinosaurs would threaten an autumn of discontent, that kind of thing, maybe worse.
Can't see it happening though 
Carfiend said:
Minnesota folks don't say "Yeeeehaaaa", just a side note for you there.
Anyhow, the state will do quite fine people-wise, lots of money floating around there, just not in their state government. Much of that is the Republicans trying to force frugal spending measures that cut into government programs which are the life blood of any Democrat wanting a vote. They can't get it past the Democratic Governor's veto. Only way to do that is with a 2/3rds vote. The Republicans, while in majority, do not have that large of one. There is money, but without an agreed upon budget, there is technically "no money" for government. It is a game to make each side look bad. This tactic is being played out in many states as well as in the federal government as we speak. Jimbeaux said:
It is a game to make each side look bad. This tactic is being played out in many states as well as in the federal government as we speak.
IIRC the article pointed out that this same thing happened in Minnesota 5 or 6 years ago, is it something that periodically happens in states which aren't strongly polarised politically?turbobloke said:
Jimbeaux said:
It is a game to make each side look bad. This tactic is being played out in many states as well as in the federal government as we speak.
IIRC the article pointed out that this same thing happened in Minnesota 5 or 6 years ago, is it something that periodically happens in states which aren't strongly polarised politically?
From what I can gather, the veto of the Republicans budget, or deal, was due to their insistence that it hold provision for a ban, or sever restrictions on stem cell research, and a ban on abortions? Is this why the Gov vetoed their budget, or is this just a nonsense publication?
http://minnesotaindependent.com/83578/gop-pressed-...
http://minnesotaindependent.com/83578/gop-pressed-...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff




