Our coverage of the American government shutdown

[TU Curmudgeon]

From The Economist

Our coverage of the American government shutdown
​

AMERICA’S GOVERNMENT shutdown has become the longest in history. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers remain either stuck at home or forced to work without pay. To reopen the government President Donald Trump is demanding $5.7bn for his border wall. Nancy Pelosi, who presides over the most polarised House of Representatives in recent memory, does not want to give it to him. Read our latest coverage here:

COMMENT:-

Not a "news" item, but I thought that the links might help provide some clearer understanding of what is happening and what might happen from a source that doesn't really have a dog in the fight.
​

 

[Amelia]

I couldn't read it since I wouldn't give them my email.

 

[Captain Adverse]

From The Economist

Our coverage of the American government shutdown
​

AMERICA’S GOVERNMENT shutdown has become the longest in history. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers remain either stuck at home or forced to work without pay. To reopen the government President Donald Trump is demanding $5.7bn for his border wall. Nancy Pelosi, who presides over the most polarised House of Representatives in recent memory, does not want to give it to him. Read our latest coverage here:

COMMENT:-

Not a "news" item, but I thought that the links might help provide some clearer understanding of what is happening and what might happen from a source that doesn't really have a dog in the fight.
​

Well I can't read the article because it is behind a paywall.

The only thing I can see is the Chart showing shutdowns since 1980, and the first paragraph stating Trump wants 5.7 Billion for a wall and Pelosi does not want to give it to him.

It does show 12 Democratic-led shutdowns during four Republican Presidencies, including the current 28 day and counting current one; and 3 Republican-led shutdowns during 2 Democrat Presidencies.

That all but one of the Democrat-led shutdowns lasted less than 5 days except for the current one which has lasted 28 days, while Republican-led shutdowns were 5 days, 17(?) days, and 21(?) days.

What is the take-away in the article? Perhaps you can cite something?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I couldn't read it since I wouldn't give them my email.

Sorry about that, but you'll have to ask someone else how to avoid "pay walls".

PS - It's not all that difficult.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Well I can't read the article because it is behind a paywall.

The only thing I can see is the Chart showing shutdowns since 1980, and the first paragraph stating Trump wants 5.7 Billion for a wall and Pelosi does not want to give it to him.

It does show 12 Democratic-led shutdowns during four Republican Presidencies, including the current 28 day and counting current one; and 3 Republican-led shutdowns during 2 Democrat Presidencies.

That all but one of the Democrat-led shutdowns lasted less than 5 days except for the current one which has lasted 28 days, while Republican-led shutdowns were 5 days, 17(?) days, and 21(?) days.

What is the take-away in the article? Perhaps you can cite something?

The article links to other articles, some of which are still behind a pay wall (which I will not tell you how to avoid [others might, but I won't]) and some of which are not.

Each article deals with a different aspect of the shutdown and not simply "Who was the President when it happened?" (which is an incredibly simplistic way of looking at the various situations).

 

[Captain Adverse]

The article links to other articles, some of which are still behind a pay wall (which I will not tell you how to avoid [others might, but I won't]) and some of which are not.

Each article deals with a different aspect of the shutdown and not simply "Who was the President when it happened?" (which is an incredibly simplistic way of looking at the various situations).

So, you recognize that the article is not accessible, respond that the info might be found "elsewhere" but also behind paywalls, then posit what I was "trying to say" while at the same time offering an "evaluation" of the merits of your assumption of "what I was trying to say?" :doh

I simply pointed out all that was available to see, and then asked you to provide a citation or some other info/clarification of the article's point so we could see and address it; and your confirmation bias leads you to fallacious responses?

Whatever. :coffeepap:

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

So, you recognize that the article is not accessible, respond that the info might be found "elsewhere" but also behind paywalls, then posit what I was "trying to say" while at the same time offering an "evaluation" of the merits of your assumption of "what I was trying to say?" :doh

I simply pointed out all that was available to see, and then asked you to provide a citation or some other info/clarification of the article's point so we could see and address it; and your confirmation bias leads you to fallacious responses?

Whatever. :coffeepap:

The "article" had NO "point of view", it consisted solely (well, other than the first paragraph) of links to other articles - all of which I was able to access (and I do NOT subscribe to "The Economist") - with a little bit of effort - and which I thought that others might find interesting.

If others don't feel like exercising a bit of ingenuity and/or effort that is their choice.

NONE of the articles referenced in the "index of articles" was current enough to qualify for the time limits of the forum, but I found all of them interesting to one degree or another and simply felt that any conscientious person MIGHT feel the same way.

"Here's an interesting place to look for information that I have found." says exactly zero about the contents of the articles found there and neither adopts (to any degree) nor reject (to any degree) those articles.

Your comment dealt strictly with "Who the President was when __[fill in the blank]__ happened." and, personally, I don't find such a simplistic analysis very much more helpful than "The majority of shutdown have started on a __[fill in the blank]__." or "More shutdowns have happened when the surname of the President started with the letter 'C' than have happened with surnames that started with any other letter.".

PS - SOME of the articles ARE accessible easily and some are not accessible EASILY. None of the articles are NOT accessible.

 

[Captain Adverse]

...Your comment dealt strictly with "Who the President was when __[fill in the blank]__ happened." and, personally, I don't find such a simplistic analysis very much more helpful than "The majority of shutdown have started on a __[fill in the blank]__." or "More shutdowns have happened when the surname of the President started with the letter 'C' than have happened with surnames that started with any other letter.".

Actually my comment mentioned what the sole paragraph available in the story said in brief, and then described the sole chart provided.

Was my description of either in any way inaccurate? If so please point it out.

If not, acknowledge that I did nothing other than to report what was actually visibly available, and then asked you to provide more info on what we are supposed to be discussing about it. Both of your responses have been fallacious responses to issues I never raised.

However, since you state there really is nothing else for us to see, I guess there is no point to discuss. :shrug:

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Actually my comment mentioned what the sole paragraph available in the story said in brief, and then described the sole chart provided.

Was my description of either in any way inaccurate? If so please point it out.

If not, acknowledge that I did nothing other than to report what was actually visibly available, and then asked you to provide more info on what we are supposed to be discussing about it. Both of your responses have been fallacious responses to issues I never raised.

However, since you state there really is nothing else for us to see, I guess there is no point to discuss. :shrug:

There was noting about the actual article (which you might have guessed from my "Not a "news" item, but I thought that the links might help provide some clearer understanding of what is happening and what might happen from a source that doesn't really have a dog in the fight." comment.

I thought that the information in those older articles might be of interest.

Now if you want to discuss whether I was right in my opinion as to whether those articles might be of interest AFTER reading the articles, please feel free to start off with why you think that it is better to have less information than it is to have more information.

 

[bongsaway]

The article links to other articles, some of which are still behind a pay wall (which I will not tell you how to avoid [others might, but I won't]) and some of which are not.

Each article deals with a different aspect of the shutdown and not simply "Who was the President when it happened?" (which is an incredibly simplistic way of looking at the various situations).

We all know it's hillary's emails causing the shutdown, there I said it.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

We all know it's hillary's emails causing the shutdown, there I said it.

Thank you for brightening my day.

However, I have a question, is it true that all of her eMails were written in Kenyan?

 

[bongsaway]

Thank you for brightening my day.

However, I have a question, is it true that all of her eMails were written in Kenyan?

So you have seen the emails. I suggest keeping your head down, deep state and all.

 

[Yakshi]

Thanks for the link. I didn’t even need to clear my cookies to access each of the articles.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Thanks for the link. I didn’t even need to clear my cookies to access each of the articles.

I had to do a bit of a workaround on the first two, but the rest were easier.

Hope they provided a bit of insight into how different views see the situation.