Curious to hear your thoughts about the 2013 shutdown which was basically the exact same situation but with the political parties reversed... was the Obama administration in the wrong in that case then?

As for the main topic, government shutdowns mean basically enough and the average person will not be impacted by it in any meaningful way. Most people do not care about this because it really does mean nothing to them.

If only we could get a permanent government shutdown then we would all be better off ... all governments do is waste money, oppress people, and kill people and they are in general very good at all 3. 

I could be wrong but didn't the GOP control the house during Obama's 2nd term?

Democrat president and democrat majority senate, but republicans did control house at the time. Still nearly identical situation ... political grandstanding by opposition party to get their way even if it leads to government shutdown. 

I was just pointing out to him that hypocrisy of putting all the blame on the republicans today when same thing happened 5 years ago. None of it means anything though like I said, US government is on autopilot and functions same even with a "shutdown". 

USA is not a dictatorship. Opinions other than the President's matter. Like the majority of people, who voted against Trump.

DACA and CHIP were used as bargaining chips to fund the wall. That's why a deal couldn't be reached. Trump assured everyone that Mexico will pay for the wall. But now he's trying to make the American people to pay for it. And to entice Democrats, they offered things like protection for children, healthcare and disaster relief. How gracious of them...

Well now it seems that funding for CHIP was used as a bargaining chip to keep the government open temporarily. (Again, how gracious of the Republicans. They're really showing that they care about sick people, and children...) So they can't use sick children as hostage next time they ask for funds for Trumps wall that Mexico was gonna pay for.

The comparison is pretty vacuous without context.  For example, isn't it true that the shutdown was mostly engineered in the House, where Republicans were in charge?  If so, calling them the "opposition party" is less accurate.  Another important piece of information is which side is making demands, and what the demands are.  In 2013, wasn't the major thing that Republicans wanted to change the status quo by ending Obamacare?  And just recently, isn't the major thing that Trump wanted to change the status quo by building his wall?  Oddly enough, I'm less confident about the recent one than the older one; I only paid cursory attention to it. 

In 2013 the Republicans were in majority of just the house while democrats held senate as well as the presidency. The original point I was responding to was the idea that 2018 Republican majority senate / house / president are supposed to capitulate to the demands of senate democrats in regards to DACA and chain migration / etc.

If the ruling party is supposed to just roll over and work it out with the opposition then why didn't democrats in 2013 who controlled the executive and half of the legislative branches of government care about republican demands? Ultimately, they were the ones in charge since Obama could just veto things at the end of the line. 

Before going into the midterm republicans need more victories ... a border wall (Trump's key campaign promise no less) and an end to chain migration would be another win along side the tax reform that already passed. Giving the democrats DACA for nothing in return would be a terrible idea. 

USA is not a dictatorship. Opinions other than the President's matter. Like the majority of people, who voted against Trump.

DACA and CHIP were used as bargaining chips to fund the wall. That's why a deal couldn't be reached. Trump assured everyone that Mexico will pay for the wall. But now he's trying to make the American people to pay for it. And to entice Democrats, they offered things like protection for children, healthcare and disaster relief. How gracious of them...

Well now it seems that funding for CHIP was used as a bargaining chip to keep the government open temporarily. (Again, how gracious of the Republicans. They're really showing that they care about sick people, and children...) So they can't use sick children as hostage next time they ask for funds for Trumps wall that Mexico was gonna pay for.

This happened because Trump torpedoed the first bipartisan plan before attempting to torpedo the GOP plan which actually made it through.  This didn't have to happen.  He asked congress to come up with a plan, they did, and then he shot it down.  Trump made it so that Republicans couldn't work out a deal with the dems.  

The thing is, in 2013 Republicans were specifically gunning for a shutdown.  They didn't want to look for a deal, they wanted to look for a showdown.  Their demand to kill Obamacare was much different from the Democrats' demand about DACA:  it's on a whole different order of magnitude.  It's closer to if the Democrats said "we are going to shut down everything unless you completely repeal the tax bill you just passed".  In fact, it's arguable that the Republicans back then deliberately picked an issue they knew the Democrats could never give in on to stage the battle over. 

On another note, since you are trying to look for parallels between that shutdown and this one, the Republican position in both cases was to change the status quo, while the Democratic position in both cases was to keep the status quo.