

How much has the shutdown cost? There's an app for that. - outline
http://shutdown.outline.com

======
JumpCrisscross
" _That estimate, from economic consulting firm IHS Global Insight, covers
just the cost in work and services the government is unable to perform as it
furloughs 800,000 federal workers. According to IHS, pay for federal employees
is considered part of the Gross Domestic Product, which is the total value of
all goods and services produced in the nation each year._ "

ADD:

1\. Lost business from unavailable infrastructure, e.g. BEA numbers being
unavailable.

2\. Long-run increased cost of doing business from the political volatility
this sets a precedent for. This also includes any risk-premium that may be
built into future Treasury prices (unlikely to be anything but zero, barring a
default).

SUBTRACT:

1\. Recoverable damage, e.g. if you can't get a passport this week for a
vacation in a month you can get it in 2 weeks without compromising any plans.

2\. Saved government spending. This reduces the deficit. This reduces expected
future (a) inflation, (b) taxation, or (c) default risk.

~~~
Uhhrrr
So IHS is just counting the money saved by not paying non-essential employees
as a "cost"? That's pretty bogus.

------
pbreit
The source seems to refer to a reduction in gov payrolls/spending as a
reduction in GDP as a cost. That seems like a stretch.

The only costs I would consider are costs directly related to having folks
stay home and lost revenue related to closures.

------
slg
If you click through to the eventual source, the _cost_ is the predicted
amount that will not be added to GDP. I am not sure that really qualifies at a
cost.

~~~
dragonwriter
Something that you would otherwise get that you don't get because of a
particular action is a cost of that action. I don't think that's particularly
controversial view.

~~~
pbreit
But is a reduction in GDP really a "cost"? To who?

~~~
dragonwriter
> But is a reduction in GDP really a "cost"?

Yes.

> To who?

It's creation of value that would otherwise happen that is not happening; its
a net cost to the nation as a whole. Which particular firms and individuals
are paying it is, perhaps, harder to determine.

~~~
pbreit
But the money will get spent eventually. And didn't it reside in consumer
hands before it became tax coffers?

I still have a tough time with reduced government spending being considered a
cost.

------
DigitalSea
It's ironic the shutdown is because of there being no money to spend and the
shutdown is costing money which makes sense. But according to this calculator
which references an NBC Business News link as costing $12.5 million per hour
the current cost is approaching 600 million, crazy.

~~~
dragonwriter
> It's ironic the shutdown is because of there being no money to spend

The shutdown is not because there is no money to spend. The shutdown is
because there is no authority to continue to spend money. The two are not the
same thing.

~~~
pbreit
Can you explain how they are different as it relates to get OP calling it
ironic?

~~~
dragonwriter
It might be ironic either way (irony is inherently subjective), but as irony
is based on contrast between reality and expectations and expectations of the
results of an "action taken because I don't have any money" and those of an
"action taken because, independent of how much money I have, I am legally
prohibited to spend it except for certain narrowly-prescribed purposes, none
of which is 'efficiency'" are different in ways which, at least arguably, are
relevant to whether or not "this action results, in net, in greater costs for
less benefits" conflicts with them.

------
sgloutnikov
$3473.80/sec, if that means anything... :D

------
avty
The shutdown has saved us billions and continues to bear fruit.

~~~
bnolsen
The shutdown temporarily costs money since the leeches working for the
government which itself produces NOTHING aren't leeching at the moment. Money
isn't getting printed or borrowed to artificially boost the economy and the
current house of cards set up by all the huge debt accumululation.

Theoretically they should get real jobs in the private sector producing real
wealth. Unfortunately there needs to be some serious economic correction to
get rid of all the crap currently in the system before things would start to
really improve. But cutting the government down to size is absolutely
essential for this to even begin to happen.

