If the US shutdown were a sweetshop

Up-to-date as ever and posting only just after the shutdown has been sorted I thought people might find this helpful (sorry, my course gives me NO free time at all!!).

A friend asked me on Facebook to explain the US shutdown and use sweets as a way to explain how money is handed out.

So, below is what I posted to help her out:

"......Let's give the sweets idea a try. Congress approves how the sweets are handed out and Obama signs that plan into law. However the Republicans won't approve a budget (the sweet distribution) if it still funds Obamacare (the inevitable trip to the dentist) whilst Obama won't sign a budget that doesn't. Obama is right as Obamacare is protected by a Supreme Court (or if you prefer a Cadbury's legal department) decision. However this means that atm most people who work for the federal government don't get any sweets and therefore aren't at work (the Army etc are protected, which is helpful as they have to exercise due to their sweet intake). Basically the Republicans are acting like toddlers with no sweets and sulk and strop about hoping that their behaviour will help them get their way. However, as all parents know, it won't."

Thankfully since then the GOP came to it's senses and approved a budget plan. 

The next fiscal issue will arise early next year when the current agreement runs out and once again there will be arguing over how the US Government gives out its money.

The fact that it is not "its money" and that most of US debt is based on Chinese bonds appears to be less of a worry to lawmakers than it should be.

Ho hum....

Debate warmly encouraged.