Best
128 Comments
Post
  • #1
    !
    Its been overblown by Obama on his Sky is Falling tour. There won't be any drastic changes in anyone's life.
  • #7
    !
    You must give Obama credit. No President is as purposefully divisive. Never misses an opportunity to slander any one who dares disagree with his agenda driven tripe.
  • #29
    !
    Totally correct, the only problem I see is what will Obama do when exactly nothing happens? There was a sequester during Reagan's term and no one even noticed. Obama is still running against congress, he has yet to OWN the office of POTUS and continues to not want his name connected to anything that may have an adverse effect.
  • #65
    !
    I wonder if the Red States will be given a dose of their own medicine disproportionate to Blue States. There are a lot of decisions as where layoffs will be made within each agency and which services to cut. Like which small airfield will no longer have air traffic. A lot of judgment calls
  • #67
    !
    @Leftofliberal if we don't quit arguing about this and CUT spending everything will shut down. A bitter pill is hard to swallow but if it prevents us from death it's worth it.
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    Lets be clear. It's not a spending cut. They are still spending more than last year. This only means they are not going to spend as much more.
  • #22
    !
    @AceLuby just less than they planned to spend. I honestly just saw it in cspan a senator was explaining it. Iv heard it before. But regardless it's a very small percent of spending that is being over blown.
  • #26
    !
    @NTBFW the numbers that were used in your link are the same numbers that George Will was throwing around Sunday morning.

    But, I just saw an interview this a.m. which contends that the % of cuts, once non-discretionary spending is subtracted from the total budget, increases the cuts from 2-4% to 14-20%.

    ***now, I am not endorsing either argument. Personally, I believe the "truth" lies somewhere in the middle***
  • R Load more replies

  • #15
    !
    The "cuts" will not affect anyone as much as our current financial model of financing over 40% of our government's budget which will affect future generations and limit what they will do as they will have to deal with our annual trillion dollar deficits and the debt service associated with our debt. How can anyone justify these huge deficits? Washington is talking about tens of billions in "cuts" when the reality is that they should be talking of cuts in the hundreds of billions. Where would our generation be today had previous generations felt it was acceptable to finance over 40% of the government's costs unto us. What we are doing to future generations is immoral.
  • #9
    !
    It's being reported that we'll still be spending more in the next fiscal year. That these "cuts" are nothing more than cuts to the scheduled increases. Only in DC is less of an increase considered a cut.
  • #14
    !
    Excellent point. The only people taking a real pay cut are government employees. For years the federal budget has had an automatic spending increase built into it. These cuts mean that instead of a department's budget increasing by 7%, the budget will increase by 5%. That is still greater than the rate of inflation and will not hurt anything. All this drama is just for show. Always has been.
  • #5
    !
    I feel for those which might be hurt by these cuts, but it is over a period of time these cuts will take effect...spending needs to be curtailed...and if this is one of the ways it needs to be done...so be it...
  • #20
    !
    All they really are is a reduction in the increase in spending. It not going to be less than this year. This is a 4.5% increase in spending. Instead of a7% increase.
  • #2
    !
    I support sequester. Except for the loss of vaccines nothing above bothers me. The military cuts are long overdue. I care about education but schools should be funded from local budgets.
  • #8
    !
    I disagree. The problem with that is then you have 'good schools' in rich neighborhoods and 'bad schools' in poor neighborhoods. Everyone should have access to a good education.
  • #13
    !
    @AceLuby Well I agree with that, but DOJ could enforce the equal protection clause to acheive that. I hate it when feds get involved in giving money to hire police etc. Certian things are local issues. With the exception of subsidizing school lunch/breakfast programs I don't want federal monies going to local government. Esp schools that teach things like creationism. Let the church pay for the classes.
  • #30
    !
    @AceLuby Of course they should, but since the majority of funds for public education come from the state, the sequester will actually have a very minor, if any, effect on the schools. Bad schools vs Good schools are under the control of the state, not the fed. gov. Most states have adopted some form of "busing" to equalize the playing field.
  • #33
    !
    @AceLuby

    As I have posted before, if your school sucks it's likely that the school board (which the local community voted for) is the problem. A lot can be done at that level.
  • R Load more replies

  • #36
    !
    In the past 4 years I have been subjected to 2 furloughs with no pay and no pay increases so as far as I am concerned. Any damned government worker can get bent over as well. Too freaking bad. Over those 4 years I lost 25% of my income as well. 26 year old's added to healthcare and added cost. Yes I do blame Obama a lying sack of Monkey S**t
  • #32
    !
    Obama is scaring people but the numbers do not lie. If we go on no one should be laid off. Also remember that the Obama administration has stated people will "LOSE" their jobs. So lets say they do get laid off and then the sequester is signed. Do they get their jobs back. According to Obama -NO! But the bottom line he is the one who is not comming to the table. I live nine miles from Fort Knox and have a home repair and remodeling business and all of those federal workers are scared. Therefor they are not spending money. This is the change voters wanted. And today I found out a while back he signed an executive order to a Welfare reform bill signed by Bill Clinton to make it easier for people to get welfare and when on welfare they do not have to look for work. How much more of this can we take as taxpayers?
  • #19
    !
    My word; if cutting 86 billion from a 3.5 trillion dollar budget as king barry states will be devastating.What would real cuts to the budget or 16 trillion dollar debt do?As for the military barry is the commander in chief and has constitutional authority to restrict cuts that would adversely affect it.The great divider continues his plan to hurt America in any way he can.
  • #11
    !
    My husband works for a defense contractor at a local air base. His salary is already covered, however, when the base shuts down one day a week, he will not be permitted to go to work, since the rules require at least one civilian employee to be present when the contractors are. Apparently there is still some debate as to whether or not they will be permitted to work from home. Interesting dilemma. Yes, this mess was created by Obama and Jack Lew.
  • #96
    !
    This is the biggest crock of crap ever, only lazy ass incompetents couldn't manage a 2% budget cut. Every tax paying american just got a 2% hit and we seem to be dealing with it. Why can't the DC half wits figure it put?
  • #89
    !
    This is like panicking over the lose of 4 crayons out of a 64 pack when you going to gain 5 crayons next week. If Washington can't figure out how to cut $85 billion from 16 trillion without affecting essential programs, then we need to reconsider who and what we call our political representatives. This is a scare tactic and a purely political stage show.
  • #69
    !
    Since 85 billion is roughly 28 days of spending by our Bozo the clown wannabe gov't. You telling me they can't go 28 days without spending $, wow, and I thought my daughter was bad.
    It's something like 2.5% cuts to all the many gov't depts. I feel sure each dept waste more than that, so a little housekeeping would do them good in my opinion.
  • #37
    !
    This thing has been blown out of proportion, but you can't tell what this screwy bunch in the White House will do. It's all political with them, We The People just don't count.
  • #27
    !
    In order to grasp every “crisis” coming from Washington and the White House, one must remember the Obama is an admitted disciple of Alinsky and his “bible” is Rules for Radicals.

    Alinsky's ninth rule is:“The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”

    This is translated in obama terms as never waste a potential crisis. He created this one and is now taking advantage of the opportunity is presents to frighten the weak minded into giving him his way yet again. I'm hoping someone with courage appears in congress, from either party, to provide him with a map to Hades and the offer of car fare.

    The "cuts" aren't money that existed, they are reductions in additional spending. If the issue were REALLY hard dollars, how about laying off some aids and support personnel. Maybe a few speechwriters and spokespeople need to be laid off and OUR EMPLOYEES need to stand up for themselves and tell us what they really think.
  • #25
    !
    Like Democrats know the world won't end because of this . and like most people know Obama will not have to cutter aviation TSA screeners or ship building... but he will to cause pain. he could just as easily furlow EPA workers.
  • #23
    !
    I agree here that the cuts need to happen. What many here do not get is how much of the wasteful spending could go and that would more than make up for these proposed cuts. Additionally, what many here don't understand is that "Sequester" will affect you in one way or another, even if you aren't a government employee or government contractor. Local economies will experience recession (all those local stores outside government locations will see less business). Less meat inspectors mean higher meat prices and less availability of meats. Less TSA agents (not necessarily a bad thing) means longer wait times for security at airports). Less defense spending makes the country more vulnerable, despite what certain people want to believe. Again, yes cuts should happen, but there are other areas in which they could take place. With the amount of wasteful spending, we could probably cut that $1.2 Trillion annually and nobody would miss it.
  • #128
    !
    Won't directly impact me, but it's definitely going to impact New Mexico, with at least 4 major US Armed Forces bases, 2 national laboratories, and dozens of different federal agencies; then there's a tremendous amount of people on unemployment insurance; etc. And of course, the contractors who rely on the Air Bases, national laboratories, and federal agencies which rely on federal dollars, from the janitors performing cleanup; to organizations like Ross Aviation at Kirtland AFB/the Sunport flying individuals to various air bases around New Mexico, etc. It will have a pretty big impact on New Mexico, that's for sure, especially since it's having a tough time getting back on its feet after the recession.
  • R Load more comments...
Post