> The government shutdown is taking a growing toll on air traffic controllers who are required to work without pay.

Super weird that this part is actually legal. Either they should be required to work or goverment should be required to pay.

The US has some very strange definitions of Freedom.

Forcing people to work without paying them sounds like another one of those “uniquely American” problems like school shootings or healthcare.

It sucks but the alternative is to let the government spend nonexistent money in violation of statute.

And nobody is forced to work, like being at a startup that has some liquidity hiccups, sometimes you take a delayed paycheck. Other times you find other work.

And for the nonessential employees, they legally can't work but get paid for their time when the government reopens. If you aren't living paycheck to paycheck, it's a great opportunity to work on that Steam backlog.

Always interesting seeing Americans justify the dysfunction of their system.

This is terrible, and simply shouldn’t happen in what is ostensibly the best country in the world. Don’t justify it.

I wish you had something more substantive than "don't justify it".

The system is behaving correctly in the face of political dysfunction. Republicans don't want to fund healthcare subsidies and they don't want to negotiate appropriations in the house because Epstein. Democrats want healthcare subsidies. They have failed to compromise.

It is good that the system is gradually grinding to a halt. It forces a resolution and provides valuable data for voters. It would be worse if the government could carry on indefinitely using pretend money. I especially don't trust this administration with the power of pretend money. It is also good that the government didn't fully deadlock on day 1. Many critical services remain functional.

This isn't a great situation but I would be interested to hear about systems that handle deadlocks more gracefully. For sure I am cautiously on board with the idea of holding new elections in the event of legislative dysfunction.

All money is "pretend money"

Only if you fundamentally ignore like, exceedingly basic macro economics.

The US is $38 TRILLION Dollars in debt. I think it’s safe to say it’s been operating on pretend money for a long while.

Also it’s bizarre you're fine with millionaires who are still getting paid while doing nothing to resolve their lack of agreement withholding the pay of people going to work who can’t afford rent, food and healthcare. There is no world where that is ok.

I don't recall saying that was fine.

I recommend you seek a better familiarity with nuance. It'll help you understand the difference between debt and pretend money.

Have a good day.

They have now compromised and the compromise is everything Trump wants and nothing the people want. Like usual with Democrats.

"Explanation" and "justification" are not synonyms, even if you just want an excuse for a Twitter-esque slap at Americans.

> It sucks but the alternative is

This is plain justification regardless of context.

With context it’s even worse, because the real alternative is to have a functional government, and a non far right president, who doesn’t happily kill people, if we want to talk about hypotheticals like using real money way after genie was let out of the bottle.

.... That's not a justification. That's an explanation of how our system, in reality, works.

Also, "the real alternative is a completely hypothetical, made up universe" is bizarro nonsense. In the actual, real world, that actually exists today, there are two ways of doing a thing. That you don't like those isn't particularly relevant.

But hey, America/Americans suck, right? That's really all you wanted to get across in the first place.

In the actual real world there are developed countries that don’t put up with this dysfunction.

>And nobody is forced to work, like being at a startup that has some liquidity hiccups, sometimes you take a delayed paycheck. Other times you find other work.

No, ATC's are actually forced to work by statute and contract.

It's an incredibly demanding and selective job (you literally can't become one after age 30), so there are no ATC's on the bench.

Their contract doesn't permit them to resign?

They'll get back pay when gov resumes, and they know it. It doesn't make it any easier to get by in the meantime, especially for those that live paycheck to paycheck.

Yep. Tricky for those that have childcare costs that they now cannot meet. Some in similar positions are forced out of work.

Is this like mandatory you have to work, or ... you have to work or you'll be fired?

If the former, I always wonder about folks who were set to retire, age out, got a new job they're starting, have health issues, etc..

Have to work but can phone in sick, more and more of them will phone in sick.

It's a weird system over the pond I have to say.

I think its also, you'll never have a federal job again.

a very strange group of people to play chicken with as well, considering how important their job is

ATC has played this game of chicken before and lost. I'm sure they are well aware they need to tread carefully.

I doubt history will repeat on that.

> air traffic controllers who are required to work without pay

What happens to them if they just refuse to work? They certainly cannot be prosecuted, as the 13th Amendment prohibits slavery.

This is what I like to hear before I leave for Antarctica tomorrow...

Surely after Tuesday's election results and with Thanksgiving coming up the senate will nuke the fillibuster.

>> senate will nuke the fillibuster.

No, they will not. They will make a deal, probably covering spending until the end of this year.

Doesn't that have to go back to the House?

They canceled the shutdown. Democrats agreed to give Trump everything he wants and nothing the Democrats want. Which is super weird because the election just showed people want what the Democrats want. Anyways.

No they didn't. Nobody has even voted yet. And it still must go to the House for a vote assuming it passes the Senate. The measly 8 democrats that were in favor of this were all literally who's and known traitors like Fetterman.

How it actually works, every single time:

A majority of (or at least, enough) Democrats decide they want something unpopular.

They calculate exactly how many Democrats need to vote for the thing they want to happen. Notice how it always passes by one vote.

They figure out which Democrats who want the unpopular thing and will suffer the fewest consequences by voting for it. Notice how the Democrats who voted for the unpopular thing are always ones who are either unable to be voted out soon, or are guaranteed to be voted out because they hit term limits soon, and in either case they have nothing to lose by being unpopular.

Only those Democrats vote for the unpopular thing, and the remaining Democrats and the party as a whole suffer minimal reputational damage.

In this case, the Senate Democrat leader Chuck Schumer, despite voting against the unpopular thing because his reputational damage would not be minimal, was almost certainly involved in organizing it.

They may or may not compensate them for being the fall guys. Possibly the thing itself is enough compensation. Politicians love when their private jets are allowed to take off because air traffic controllers are getting paid (or forced to work for no pay).