# debt ceiling deal..... does trumps grassroots actually want to shut the gov down? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 7, 2017, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701 "2017-09-07T02:03:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/42 "2017-10-29T13:27:45Z")
And maybe someday someone will tell us \*why \*it’s a good thing if We the People do less for each other. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/43 "2017-10-29T16:10:45Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I always find it amazing that the people who talk about smaller government usually advocate for crippling small government and enlarging large government. Some of them even create even larger governments for themselves. While I don’t think those things are necessarily contradictory, I’m not one of those folks so don’t be too amazed. The idea of crippling the fed government is borne of the realization that there are few if any realistic mechanisms to shrink the size of government. As a result, a lot of the maneuvers are containment type actions. I wouldn’t be opposed to any legislative action needing a supermajority (2/3rds or 3/4s) at every level of government. This would ensure that the only legislative action taken has broad consent of the governed. The default position should always be “no”, and to overcome that it should require that broad support. This would result in a lot less legislative action, which sounds great to me. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/44 "2017-10-29T16:33:24Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Exactly. _Why_ a smaller government? > > Personally, I’m for cutting military spending by 50% or so, with veteran’s benefits/health care, etc. being exempt from the cuts. Then jack up the marginal tax rates back to the Eisenhower era, with a 91% top end. Then tack on some really confiscatory taxes on Wall Street, close all their loopholes like Carried Interest, raise the Estate Tax to 75% and a few other tweaks. I’m generally in favor of higher tax rates for the ‘job providers’ but I don’t see any reason why it has to be anywhere near as high as it was in the years following WWII. Would probably be enough to have top marginal rates between 40-50% effectively. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/45 "2017-10-29T16:36:51Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I wouldn’t be opposed to any legislative action needing a supermajority (2/3rds or 3/4s) at every level of government. This would ensure that the only legislative action taken has broad consent of the governed. The default position should always be “no”, and to overcome that it should require that broad support. This would result in a lot less legislative action, which sounds great to me. That’s a terrible idea that’s been tried with disastrous results in California. By doing that, the will of the voting majority in the most recent elections is stymied by self-interest of individuals of a minority who have no incentive to cooperate with the needs of the public at large. Paying taxes is a duty of individuals, raising taxes at the appropriate time is a responsibility for representatives in government. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/46 "2017-10-29T16:41:46Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > And maybe someday someone will tell us \*why \*it’s a good thing if We the People do less for each other. Those who advocate smaller government decry a type of oppression committed by the State while ignoring that oppression can be perpetrated by one group of private individuals abusing other private individuals. Slavery wasn’t practiced by the state, but it was brutally oppressive all the same. Some people depend on the state not because they have bad virtues but because they need to be protected against the abuse of private individuals and the lingering social and economic effects of those abuses. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/47 "2017-10-29T22:54:11Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **Bone** : > > While I don’t think those things are necessarily contradictory, I’m not one of those folks so don’t be too amazed. The idea of crippling the fed government is borne of the realization that there are few if any realistic mechanisms to shrink the size of government. As a result, a lot of the maneuvers are containment type actions. And that’s exactly why crippling the federal government is foolish, because the federal government is the most effective means to contain the state governments. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/48 "2017-10-29T23:40:30Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > There is no reason to have a debt ceiling at all in the modern world. It can be eliminated or set at infinity. It exists solely so there can be political theater around it. > > If you want a discussion on whether we should eliminate budget deficits, go ahead. But the debt ceiling has zero relevance to that issue. This. The shutter-downers have no idea what this distinction means. By the time we get around to the taking-on of debt, the money has been spent. The cow has left the barn. When we talk about not raising the debt ceiling, Congress is deciding whether to send itself a sternly worded letter in the form of defaulting on US sovereign debt. It does nothing to reduce deficits or spending. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2017, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/49 "2017-10-29T23:45:49Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > While I don’t think those things are necessarily contradictory, I’m not one of those folks so don’t be too amazed. The idea of crippling the fed government is borne of the realization that there are few if any realistic mechanisms to shrink the size of government. Why do you think shrinking the government is necessary? Can you articulate what’s the right size of the government? What are your metrics on “size”? How do you know the government is too big rather than too small? I think the real answer is “I don’t like some of the things government does, and I assume they’ll get squeezed first.” But what if that’s not the case? What if the government gets shrunk not by cutting Social Security or whatever sticks in your craw, but whatever you find more important than that? What if all the shrinkage only leaves stuff that you hate? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/50 "2017-10-30T01:54:45Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > And that’s exactly why crippling the federal government is foolish, because the federal government is the most effective means to contain the state governments. Personally, I’m not nearly as concerned with containing the state governments as the federal government. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/51 "2017-10-30T02:02:21Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I wouldn’t be opposed to any legislative action needing a supermajority (2/3rds or 3/4s) at every level of government. This would ensure that the only legislative action taken has broad consent of the governed. The default position should always be “no”, and to overcome that it should require that broad support. Then shouldn’t elections have to be decided by 2/3rds or 3/4ths instead of majority votes? If the point is to create consensus, it should start with voters. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/52 "2017-10-30T02:10:57Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > That’s a terrible idea that’s been tried with disastrous results in California. By doing that, the will of the voting majority in the most recent elections is stymied by self-interest of individuals of a minority who have no incentive to cooperate with the needs of the public at large. Paying taxes is a duty of individuals, raising taxes at the appropriate time is a responsibility for representatives in government. I’m a fan of the tax containment practices in CA, so this isn’t very persuasive. The nature of government action is force. As a result I’m of the mind that such force should be at the consent of the governed, and the more the better. > [@Chronos](#): > > And that’s exactly why crippling the federal government is foolish, because the federal government is the most effective means to contain the state governments. Is it though? When has that happened? Sure in the areas of civil rights. I don’t think civil rights should be up for vote, but that’s just me. There aren’t other examples of the feds constraining the states in terms of spending that come to mind. To me, it’s a question of where the burden lies. Governmental action should be of last resort - to only do things that can’t be done otherwise. Things like defense, law enforcement, environmental protection, certain kinds of infrastructure, etc. The default answer to the question of whether government should act ought to be no. > [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Why do you think shrinking the government is necessary? Can you articulate what’s the right size of the government? What are your metrics on “size”? How do you know the government is too big rather than too small? Because government is force. Paine: _“Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.”_ The more powerful and large a government, the more capacity for oppressive actions by the monopoly holder of force. I cannot articulate the “right size” of government because that’s a product of the people’s will. I hope to persuade enough of my countrymen to my way of thinking, but I don’t pretend that my way is right any more than someone else’s way is wrong. It’s my preference. Reasonable people can disagree. > [@](#): > > I think the real answer is “I don’t like some of the things government does, and I assume they’ll get squeezed first.” But what if that’s not the case? What if the government gets shrunk not by cutting Social Security or whatever sticks in your craw, but whatever you find more important than that? What if all the shrinkage only leaves stuff that you hate? What if? What if things I like are cut and things I don’t like are preserved? Given the balance I think I’d take that bet. Defense, law enforcement, infrastructure, and environment are basically it. Most everything else can go (I’m sure I’ve missed some stuff). And even among those things, the can be pared back as well. Of course I’d prefer targeted cuts but that way lays folly due to concentrated benefits and diffused costs. So I think a better description would be “I don’t like _most_ of what government does, let the chips fall where they may.” ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/53 "2017-10-30T02:37:18Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The more powerful and large a government, the more capacity for oppressive actions by the monopoly holder of force. > [@](#): > > What if things I like are cut and things I don’t like are preserved? Given the balance I think I’d take that bet. Defense, law enforcement, infrastructure, and environment are basically it. Most everything else can go (I’m sure I’ve missed some stuff). Deeply concerned about monopoly of force, but you prioritize funding the use of force above all else. Would you care to demonstrate the mental yoga that holds these directly contradictory thoughts together? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/54 "2017-10-30T02:55:25Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Then shouldn’t elections have to be decided by 2/3rds or 3/4ths instead of majority votes? If the point is to create consensus, it should start with voters. if the lack of a 2/3 or 3/4 super-majority means that no one fills the seat, I might be able to get on board with this plan. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/55 "2017-10-30T03:02:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > if the lack of a 2/3 or 3/4 super-majority means that no one fills the seat, I might be able to get on board with this plan. If you think that government simply shouldn’t do as much as it is doing today, from where do you get the confidence that it will do things when needed? Like, the response to the 2008 financial crisis didn’t get the margin of vote you prefer. Do you think it would have been better for the government not to stem the financial crisis? ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/56 "2017-10-30T04:14:30Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Deeply concerned about monopoly of force, but you prioritize funding the use of force above all else. Would you care to demonstrate the mental yoga that holds these directly contradictory thoughts together? How do you think these are contradictory? I would quibble with the characterization 'above all else but it’s not critical to your point I think. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/57 "2017-10-30T04:22:04Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Then shouldn’t elections have to be decided by 2/3rds or 3/4ths instead of majority votes? If the point is to create consensus, it should start with voters. I was specific to legislative actions for a couple reasons. First, elections wouldn’t generally work if a supermajority was required, at least not within our current framework. Idealism can only go so far before it gives way to pragmatism. 2nd, I see it as different in choosing our representatives which in and of itself doesn’t impose upon the electorate - it’s the actions of those representatives that ought be constrained. A continual cycle of representatives who cannot come together and overcome the hurdle of the supermajority doesn’t do much harm. And it’s not like the concept of tiered importance is foreign to our system of government. We recognize some decisions of greater import and thus require it. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/58 "2017-10-30T05:03:50Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If you think that government simply shouldn’t do as much as it is doing today, from where do you get the confidence that it will do things when needed? Like, the response to the 2008 financial crisis didn’t get the margin of vote you prefer. Do you think it would have been better for the government not to stem the financial crisis? Which response are you referring to? the stimulus bill? I wouldn’t have minded if that never happened. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/59 "2017-10-30T05:11:55Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Some people depend on the state not because they have bad virtues but because they need to be protected against the abuse of private individuals and the lingering social and economic effects of those abuses. What the heck is a “bad virtue”? That seems to be quite a contradiction. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/60 "2017-10-30T10:53:13Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I am sincerely curious: What do you see as the salient difference between the position you describe for yourself, and my streamlined synopsis of it? (Clearly my synopsis has no implied injunction against tax hikes.) And yet another 24 hours have gone by with no response from **Saint Cad**. I no longer expect a response from Mr. Cad, but _I appeal to other Dopers_. _ **Please help me check my sanity** _: Click to review the context and tell me if I really did MISREPRESENT(sic) **Saint Cad** ’s position? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701/61 "2017-10-30T14:59:33Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > How do you think these are contradictory? You’re concerned about the government misusing its monopoly of force, but funding its forcefulness is the top 2 of 4 items you’re concerned with. You prioritize funding of the thing you claim to fear. How is this not contradictory? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debt-ceiling-deal-does-trumps-grassroots-actually-want-to-shut-the-gov-down/795701.md?page=4)