The 2025 Government Shutdown Thread

bèlla said:

I’m not jesting nor do I expect you to agree. If you feel differently that’s okay.

$14 million for a lifespan of 80 years as the average and monies distributed from birth is $175,000 per year.
$14 million with the same lifespan with distribution occurring at 30 (the norm) is $280,000 per year.

That doesn’t factor in the cost of living or a home. If you require the latter you’ll probably have to work.

~bella

Click to expand...

Live within your means.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Live within your means.

Click to expand...

I follow that principle and I’m not a fan of debt. Not even for business purposes. I’ve seen too many people get ensnared. It’s better to find a way to make more income instead. That isn’t a popular opinion but you’ll sleep well at night.

~bella

Desk trauma said:

Yes, my heart bleeds for those having to pay taxes on their inter generational millions.

Click to expand...

This matter was raised in Australia. And it was proposed that when my wife and I shuffle off and leave out house to the kids then the value would be taxed.

Ain't no way. We worked very hard indeed to buy that house and we gave up a lot to pay the mortgage. Which went up to 17% at one point. All the money that went into that property was what was left after we had already paid a sizeable chunck of our wages in tax. Would the government want to tax me twice?

Granted that it's now worth a very large sum of money but the principle stands.

Bradskii said:

This matter was raised in Australia. And it was proposed that when my wife and I shuffle off and leave out house to the kids then the value would be taxed.

Ain't no way. We worked very hard indeed to buy that house and we gave up a lot to pay the mortgage. Which went up to 17% at one point. All the money that went into that property was what was left after we had already paid a sizeable chunck of our wages in tax. Would the government want to tax me twice?

Granted that it's now worth a very large sum of money but the principle stands.

Click to expand...

And, at least in the US, so long as it was worth less than $14 million, it wouldn't be taxed.

Desk trauma said:

If used in the dumbest way possible it only provides a comfortable income for life. How awful!

Click to expand...

If anyone wants to swap, I'm available.

I might even be persuaded to live in the USA for 14 million dollars.

iluvatar5150 said:

That's nice, but that's not what you were arguing about. The current exemptions on the estate tax leave more than enough for any one heir to be set for life without paying a penny. If you're hitting the estate tax, you're either leaving behind a business with a fair amount of assets or you're leaving wealth that would put you in the top 1-2% of Americans.

Another principle you find in the Bible is to render unto ceasar what's ceasar's.

Click to expand...

Thats inly if Ceaser demands it. In the country we get to vote for our ceaser representatives and let our desires be known. And many of us don't think ceaser deserves more money from us. No matter how much we make.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced a bill that would provide emergency SNAP funding on Wednesday.

Senate Republicans considering bill to keep SNAP benefits flowing amid the shutdown

Senate Republicans are discussing voting on a bill that would prevent millions of low-income Americans from losing access to food aid on Nov. 1. The bill from Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) would fund Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for the duration of the shutdown, which on Wednesday entered its 22nd day.

Bill to fund SNAP in shutdown introduced in House

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa) on Friday introduced a bill to fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as the government shutdown threatens payments of the food aid in some states.

The Keep SNAP Funded Act of 2025 would keep the food aid program funded during the government lapse until the Department of Agriculture is funded through regular appropriations or stopgap measures.

The bill is the companion to a SNAP-funding bill in the Senate being led by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), which Senate Republicans are reportedly considering for a floor vote. Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) is a co-sponsor of the House bill.

…..

(Louisiana) Landry declares state of emergency as federal shutdown threatens SNAP benefits

More than 792,000 Louisiana residents depend on SNAP, including about 356,800 children, 88,200 seniors, and more than 120,000 people with disabilities.

…..

Virginia governor declares state of emergency to expedite food aid during federal shutdown

Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin declared a state of emergency on Thursday to help maintain food aid for state residents as a three-week-long U.S. government shutdown threatens to halt federal benefits.

Youngkin said the move would allow him to use emergency funds to assist Virginians in the absence of federal appropriations to fund the food benefits administered by states. More than 850,000 Virginia residents would feel the impact if Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program food benefits run out on November 1, he said.

…….

(Colorado) Polis requests $10M to assist SNAP recipients amid federal government shutdown

The Colorado Governor’s Office on Wednesday submitted two requests to aid recipients of federal benefits during the federal government shutdown, including up to $10 million to support food banks and pantries. According to the press release, SNAP provides food access to 330,00 households across the state and benefits more than 600,000 Coloradans, half of whom are children.

……

(California) Gov. Gavin Newsom said California is fast-tracking $80 million in funds for food banks and will be deploying National Guard troops to help distribute food. “This is serious, this is urgent – and requires immediate action,” Newsom said. More details on the governor’s plan are expected before Nov. 1, he said.

……

(Tennessee) Congressman Steve Cohen has urged Governor Bill Lee to use the state's reserve funds to cover benefits, citing a rainy-day fund of over $2 billion.

~bella

rjs330 said:

Thats inly if Ceaser demands it. In the country we get to vote for our ceaser representatives and let our desires be known. And many of us don't think ceaser deserves more money from us. No matter how much we make.

Click to expand...

If you can get enough of your representatives to vote to change caesar’s mind, then so be it.

Bradskii said:

Ain't no way. We worked very hard indeed to buy that house and we gave up a lot to pay the mortgage. Which went up to 17% at one point. All the money that went into that property was what was left after we had already paid a sizeable chunck of our wages in tax. Would the government want to tax me twice?

Granted that it's now worth a very large sum of money but the principle stands.

Click to expand...

I understand you completely and it makes practical sense to protect your assets to pass as much as you can to your children. As my comment revealed money is a complicated subject in christian circles. The church doesn’t teach them about personal finance although they rely on their support. If you’re lucky you’ll get a class from Dave Ramsey or Crown Financial. But for the most part you’re on your own.

It isn’t the church’s responsibility to do so it’s the parents. But it’s obvious it isn’t happening and most high schools no longer require financial education to graduate. I had two years of instruction and participated in Junior Achievement which allowed you to simulate a business.

The things I learned and experienced didn’t corroborate the messages we received regarding success. Especially the sort that created multigenerational wealth. They taught you how to have enough or a little to pass along but never the rudiments of legacy and positioning. You have to discover that yourself.

When I say $14 million isn’t enough it’s probably offensive to someone who doesn’t have a 25, 50 or 100 year plan in place. Most people live in the present. They’re not thinking of their grandkids when their children are born. They choose careers over businesses and plots over land and build families without successors. It’s a question of mindset and fortitude. You’re playing the long game.

But there’s nothing wrong with that if you prefer a different approach. Where humans go awry is expecting others to follow suit and reconciling the differences in outcome when they don’t. Now everything’s changed and children are less prosperous than their parents and everyone’s upset. That’s what happens when you don’t mind your affairs and expect the world and the government to do right by your seed. Why would they?

Kudos to you for all you’ve accomplished. I’ve watched a few pieces on Australian real estate and your children are fortunate. It’s cost prohibitive for many. Well done.

~bella

bèlla said:

When I say $14 million isn’t enough it’s probably offensive to someone who doesn’t have a 25, 50 or 100 year plan in place. Most people live in the present.

Click to expand...

Even in the absurd hypothetical of yours where all heirs to such amounts of money can only place it in a vault where it’s protected from accruing interest or being used to purchase assets they could see a return on and then only take out a set amount each year it’s more than enough for a life.

Desk trauma said:

Even in the absurd hypothetical of yours where all heirs to such amounts of money can only place it in a vault where it’s protected from accruing interest or being used to purchase assets they could see a return on and then only take out a set amount each year it’s more than enough for a life.

Click to expand...

I think you’re confused. You introduced that number to the discussion not I. Reference post 206 for clarification. And once again you’re inferring. I never said anything about not accruing interest or purchasing assets. They’re fantastical creations you’ve devised in a poor attempt to justify your position. If you feel it’s enough for you that’s great. But you can’t define my standard. Just accept it.

~bella

bèlla said:

I think you’re confused. You introduced that number to the discussion not I. Reference post 206 for clarification. And once again you’re inferring. I never said anything about not accruing interest or purchasing assets. They’re fantastical creations you’ve devised in a poor attempt to justify your position. If you feel it’s enough for you that’s great. But you can’t define my standard. Just accept it.

~bella

Click to expand...

I accept that you’ll twist this however necessary to defend the absurd position that $14 million isn’t a lot of/enough money.

Desk trauma said:

I accept that you’ll twist this however necessary to defend the absurd position that $14 million isn’t a lot of/enough money.

Click to expand...

I accept your need to debate a woman’s purse for reasons that escape me. That’s why feminists exist.

~bella

bèlla said:

I accept your need to debate a woman’s purse for reasons that escape me. That’s why feminists exist.

~bella

Click to expand...

Feminism exists to defend oligarchs massive wealth transfers from taxation?

Desk trauma said:

Feminism exists to defend oligarchs massive wealth transfers from taxation?

Click to expand...

Feminism exists because some people can‘t accept the limitations of their jurisdiction. They don’t know their place. Your beef is not with me it’s with your oppressor.

~bella

bèlla said:

Feminism exists because some people can‘t accept the limitations of their jurisdiction. They don’t know their place. Your beef is not with me it’s with your oppressor.

~bella

Click to expand...

Thought were discussing the poor oppressed heirs struggle to get by on $14 million ?

bèlla said:

When I say $14 million isn’t enough it’s probably offensive to someone who doesn’t have a 25, 50 or 100 year plan in place. Most people live in the present. They’re not thinking of their grandkids when their children are born. They choose careers over businesses and plots over land and build families without successors. It’s a question of mindset and fortitude. You’re playing the long game.

Click to expand...

That was quite the post. First, I've never known anyone who could have left behind a $14M estate, even the sole proprietors. It is offensive to think the poors don't have 25 or even 50 year plans. (100 year plans are, of course, silly. No one lives that long.) The rest of this paragraph is written like it is about the landed gentry trying arrange a good marriage and "produce an heir".

Desk trauma said:

Thought were discussing the poor oppressed heirs struggle to get by on $14 million ?

Click to expand...

We were discussing the death tax and my disagreement with the charge. Some felt it was apropos given the size of the estate. I replied it wasn’t a lot and here we are. I never said they were poor or oppressed nor is it necessary to make the mental leaps you’ve taken to state my position. I don’t believe $14 million is a lot of money. There’s no ambiguity in that statement. Nor am I justifying my reason for believing so or apologizing either. That’s the truth you’re unable to accept.

~bella

bèlla said:

I don’t believe $14 million is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

lol

bèlla said:

That’s the truth you’re unable to accept.

Click to expand...

Yes, I have a hard time accepting absurdly untrue things , like considering $14 million dollars as “not a lot of money” as true.

If we’re discussing federal estate tax it’s time to point out that after $14 million in assets the rest isn’t confiscated, it’s just taxed. At rates similar to income taxes that us working slubs have to pay on our wages. The horrors.

Desk trauma said:

Yes, I have a hard time accepting absurdly untrue things , like considering $14 million dollars as “not a lot of money” as true.

Click to expand...

I’ve made no attempt to sway your opinion and wouldn’t bother. I don’t care that feel differently nor do I want your support or validation. You’re entitled to your opinion. It has no bearing on my own and would never elicit a shift. Now that we’ve agreed to disagree I trust we’re done.

~bella