Why spending will never be cut

[sarahgop]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

 

[asaratis]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

There may be some reassignment of monies...robbing Peter to pay Paul...so to speak. But there will be little reduction in spending...and certainly no real reduction in taxation.

 

[sarahgop]

both will go up and up.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Obama wants to give more free shit to the free shitters. He will never cut until we're like Greece.

Marxism sucks.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

My guess is you were not listening to an actual libertarian. The libertarian complaint regarding the sequester is that it doesn't cut nearly enough.

 

[NYcarbineer]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

You are absolutely correct.

Government is like a huge company, with branches or divisions all over country. Wherever it is has an operation, it employs people, either directly with government jobs, or indirectly with government contracts, such as a defense plant.

How much the government is spending is directly related to how much business these operations can do, and thus how many people can be employed.

Deficit spending creates and maintains these operations just as much as the taxpayer funded spending does;

to cut the deficit means cutting back or shutting down these operations all over the country, thus,

people HAVE TO LOSE THEIR JOBS, because the deficit is paying for their jobs.

Since the politicians in Washington control the spending, they control whether or not these jobs exist, whether there are more or fewer of them. But few congressmen get elected on promises to put people out of work in his district; it's always the other guy's fault we have a deficit. That's the only way he can get elected and stay elected.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I don't think that you are listening to a libertarian.

 

[Billo_Really]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

End the wars, close the majority of over 800 bases around the world and cut the defense budget in half, then keep all the rest.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Sequester is the right answer

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Looks like O is crying a river on his presser. Never was about spending cuts. I have confidence that the Rs will fold like a wet paper bag. The funniest part is that the sequester is a laugher and makes no meaningful cuts.

 

[RoadVirus]

We'll never cut spending. It'll get kicked down the road another few months because President Bongo is either busy playing golf, chatting in front of a microphone, or insisting that taxes be increased again

 

[candycorn]

Good thing the road never ends...

 

[g5000]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

No one will make serious cuts to Defense for two simple reasons: 9/11 and Benghazi.

No one wants to be the guy who cut defense spending just before the next inevitable terror attack and be blamed for each and every death.

Remember all the blame Bush got from partisans on the left for 9/11. Remember how hysterical partisans on the right have let themselves be led into getting over Benghazi even though we had many other such attacks on our overseas missions with American deaths prior to that.

Imagine that blame game times a thousand, and being the guy who voted for a defense budget cut. None of these cowards in DC wants to be that guy.

Welcome to the Road to Hell.

 

[Billo_Really]

i live in a military area and listen to a libertarian guy on the radio who is for smaller govt. however, he is aghast at the sequester because jobs and income will be lost here. he wants a "smarter" plan of cuts. needless to say, everyone will react just the same so there will never be any real cuts.

No one will make serious cuts to Defense for two simple reasons: 9/11 and Benghazi.

No one wants to be the guy who cut defense spending just before the next inevitable terror attack and be blamed for each and every death.

Remember all the blame Bush got from partisans on the left for 9/11. Remember how hysterical partisans on the right have let themselves be led into getting over Benghazi even though we had many other such attacks on our overseas missions with American deaths prior to that.

Imagine that blame game times a thousand, and being the guy who voted for a defense budget cut. None of these cowards in DC wants to be that guy.

Welcome to the Road to Hell.

Our military couldn't stop either one, so how can they be used to justify that obscene expense?