Sequester Chart of the Day.....

[iamwhatiseem]

This just in...Michelle will be limited to just $8000 for dresses to attend fundraising dinners unless the sequester can be reversed.
Its all over folks....

 

[Trajan]

As Grover Norquist intended.

I am sorry but I think you missed the memo, grover got handed his ass when the gop folded on the tax increases that obama signed jan, 3 I believe, 3rd, 4th whatever.

if cutting less than 3% of $3.6 trillion is "austerity" well, you are entitled to your opinion, but you're opinion doesn't seem well put, these are cuts to baseline increases, that is the 4-5% already approved above the depts agencies operating budgets from the year before....thats austerity?

If you watched any Nightly News tonight you saw the dire predictions of the catastrophic consequences soon to come. Did you know that even some illegal immigrants that are in prison will be released if the sequestration takes place? Course no mention of why is the President on a 100 city blame tour instead of doing his job and working with the Senate to get something to the house...nah.

well, they ( the gop) are working on giving obama 'transfer authority', so he can shuffle or that is, have his minions shuffle $$$ around.

I just watched harry reid speak to that and I have never seen him more uncomfortable, he knows hes been had, if he doesn't let it come up for a vote, or votes no, not even the craven media can protect him, the dems or obama.

 

[Circe]

If you watched any Nightly News tonight you saw the dire predictions of the catastrophic consequences soon to come. Did you know that even some illegal immigrants that are in prison will be released if the sequestration takes place? Course no mention of why is the President on a 100 city blame tour instead of doing his job and working with the Senate to get something to the house...nah.

Yeah, they are going to let loose criminal illegal aliens and they are going to stop Meals for Seniors and bankrupt all of Norfolk where the Navy builds ships and and and ----


This tactic is normal scare tactics: you figure out what the people MOST want from government services and you threaten to cut that, or in fact do cut that so as to get a reversal soon.

That's what they do in my county EVERY time there is a budget crunch. Whoops, here goes funding for the biggest, most used library in the county! So people get up a big protest and march in front of the library, and magically the county exec gets all the money he wants --- but he's not spending it all on libraries, be sure.

This administration wants to keep spending until we crash like Italy is doing right now, like Spain and Greece with their 30% unemployment rates --- I think it would be better if we practice a LOT more austerity before we get so far down as those countries are and can't get up again.

The spending just has to be reined in.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yeah I saw that chart a few days ago.

ANOTHER good reason for rethinking this policy.

Personally I think if all these cuts are done (and it really doesn't matter so much WHAT is cut) we're headed back into another recession.

Personally, I think we are heading for one if we don't get the cuts.

Yes..Austerity is the way to Prosperity.

Make that into a bumper sticker..by gumption!

You are the intellectual descendent of the people that argued that cutting spending after WWII would be a disaster.

I suggest you read your history books to find out how that turned out.

 

[ReallyMeow]

The spending just has to be reined in.

Which spending, specifically?

 

[Circe]

The spending just has to be reined in.

Which spending, specifically?

I'd like to see the reduction across the board. I realize that isn't what is going on now, that entitlements are protected. Also war expenditures, which is particularly dumb since we lose all the wars these days so those should just be jettisoned and everyone brought home at once. That would save a lot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The spending just has to be reined in.

Which spending, specifically?

All of it.

 

[hortysir]

Tell me the advantages of firing a million people to save a tiny sliver of a big number? Do we not need the services they provide? Build your case on that, not on how cheap you are.

Show me the million firings. Who is going to be fired?

 

[ReallyMeow]

No structure, no reasoning, just a repeated mantra.

Brainwashing Techniques You Encounter Every Day (and How to Avoid Them)

Who really thinks that FIRING PEOPLE will turn the economy around? Cmon tell me, who thinks UN-EMPLOYMENT is so high because we havnt FIRED ENOUGH PEOPLE YET?

Show me the million firings. Who is going to be fired?

the govt spends money doing things for you, if the govt isnt doing those things, why would people ontinue to be employed in doing them?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No structure, no reasoning, just a repeated mantra.

Brainwashing Techniques You Encounter Every Day (and How to Avoid Them)

Who really thinks that FIRING PEOPLE will turn the economy around? Cmon tell me, who thinks UN-EMPLOYMENT is so high because we havnt FIRED ENOUGH PEOPLE YET?

Show me the million firings. Who is going to be fired?

the govt spends money doing things for you, if the govt isnt doing those things, why would people ontinue to be employed in doing them?

I have a quick question.

Given the fact that everyone has known these mythical cuts were coming for the last year is it remotely possible that they could have been planned for by someone with a modicum of foresight? Are you aware that, by arguing that these cuts are not planned, you are arguing that the entire government is full of incompetent fools who have to wait until the last possible second and then cut the most devasting and visible programs? Did you know that Obama is worried about cutting $20 million from the budget of an agency that does not exist anymore? Is this supposed to make me worry that I might lose out on a groping by the TSA next time I walk past AT&T Park?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

A point that needs repeating every time the word sequester is uttered...AFTER the sequester, the government's budget is still larger than last year.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Well then, after Thirty years of these games you would think republicans would specify what they want cut.

 

[sparky]

naw. more fun to play the political shell game.....~S~

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Well then, after Thirty years of these games you would think republicans would specify what they want cut.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Well then, after Thirty years of these games you would think republicans would specify what they want cut.

Well, what exactly is it that you want cut? Be decisive.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Well then, after Thirty years of these games you would think republicans would specify what they want cut.

Well, what exactly is it that you want cut? Be decisive.

First of all IT ISN'T A "CUT"
AFTER the sequester, the federal government will spend more money in 2013 than 2012.

 

[oldfart]

well, they ( the gop) are working on giving obama 'transfer authority', so he can shuffle or that is, have his minions shuffle $$$ around.

I just watched harry reid speak to that and I have never seen him more uncomfortable, he knows hes been had, if he doesn't let it come up for a vote, or votes no, not even the craven media can protect him, the dems or obama.

Reid is right to be uncomfortable. The GOP trial balloon is to set aside the $85 billion sequester and let Obama make $85 billion in cuts instead. It's a can't win for Obama. Revenue increases are off the table, unlike his plan to avoid sequester. The howls of anguish from whatever constituencies get cuts will be directed to Obama with the GOP standing aside.

The book answer is for Obama to refuse such a deal. But if evil Obama pulls a coup between the jug ears, it might be interesting. Mandatory spending is off limits, so all the big ticket items are safe. But the discretionary budget is spead out to hell and gone. What, for example would be the effects of military base cutbacks only in super-red districts? Or abolishing all agricultural subsidies to corporations? If Congress is talking about giving Obama line item control of the discretionary budget, he gets to dole out the pain. News flash. It doesn't matter if he pisses off Oklahoma, they aren't going to vote blue in his lifetime.

Bring back the spoils system! Let the games begin!

 

[ReallyMeow]

First of all IT ISN'T A "CUT"
AFTER the sequester, the federal government will spend more money in 2013 than 2012.

We've been through this, if you are planning on buying a birthday cake and you use a coupon, you spent less than you would have. What are you going to do, not buy a cake? Its the kids birthday, cheapskate.

also
http://www.alternet.org/economy/eve...rinking-despite-beltway-propaganda?paging=off

 

[Avorysuds]

yes, its a lousy way to do biz., but, we did increase taxes on rates, cap gains, dividends etc. (not counting the obamacare increases), this was supposed to be followed by the 3-1 cut formula, so we had the rise in revenues, and the cuts? No where to be seen.

Guess we'll have to go the sequester route, which still don't come anywhere near the 3-1 number.



snip-

I have said it before, but it bears repeating: Even if sequestration goes through, the Congressional Budget Office predicts that spending will continue to go up over the next ten years, from $3.538 trillion in FY 2012 to $5.939 trillion in FY 2023. Even given inflation and population growth, it’s hard to see these projections as reflective of devastating spending cuts. Also, in FY2023 will be back to running $1 trillion deficit. And that’s before our real fiscal troubles start.

Sequester Armageddon? Not So Much - By Veronique de Rugy - The Corner - National Review Online

Yeah I saw that chart a few days ago.

ANOTHER good reason for rethinking this policy.

Personally I think if all these cuts are done (and it really doesn't matter so much WHAT is cut) we're headed back into another recession.

And this is why it's such a big deal, because the failed spend spend spend policies that we have been doing well before Obama was in office, but expanded by Obama needs to have something other than itself to point at as to why the economy fucking sucks. You can't spend forever and not destroy the economy, or else every nation would do it and never have a recession.

 

[Trajan]

Personally, I think we are heading for one if we don't get the cuts.

Yes..Austerity is the way to Prosperity.

Make that into a bumper sticker..by gumption!

You are the intellectual descendent of the people that argued that cutting spending after WWII would be a disaster.

I suggest you read your history books to find out how that turned out.

yup, Paul Samuelson.....



Superstar economist and devout Keynesian Paul Samuelson—later to become the first American to win the Nobel Prize in economics—predicted such shock austerity would cause “the greatest period of unemployment and industrial dislocation which any economy has ever faced.” That dire, disastrous prediction was widely held by his fellow Keynesians, with one even predicting an “epidemic of violence.”

Except the doomsayers were wrong, even though Washington obviously ignored Samuelson’s call for gradual spending reductions. Despite cuts which dwarfed those seen in the EU today—not to mention those Republicans are calling for here at home—the U.S. economy thrived. There was no mass unemployment despite rapid demobilization of the armed forces.

Real U.S. output in 1947 was 17% higher than in 1941 despite the decline in government spending.



more at-

When the U.S. really did try austerity, it worked! | AEIdeas