START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
Group Discussions
Sequester... Call my bluff...
2 years ago

John Boehner: Sequester Is Product Of Obama's 'Failed Leadership'

The Huffington Post  |  By Mollie Reilly Posted: 02/20/2013 12:22 am EST  |  Updated: 02/20/2013 1:19 pm EST

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Tuesday evening, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) blamed President Obama for the nearly $1.2 trillion in across-the-board spending cuts set to go into effect next month, labeling the looming cuts as "the president's sequester."



"Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester," Boehner writes. "What they might not realize from Mr. Obama's statements is that it is a product of the president's own failed leadership."

Boehner continues, "There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much -- we should be cutting even more -- but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it."

The sequester stems from the Budget Control Act of 2011, which mandated the cuts if a congressional "super committee" failed to reach an agreement on how to reduce the deficit. In November 2011, the bipartisan group announced it hadn't reached a deal, meaning the cuts to defense and domestic spending would go into effect in January 2013. The sequester was later delayed to begin March 1 as part of the "fiscal cliff" negotiations.



(go to link for rest)




This post was modified from its original form on 20 Feb, 12:04
2 years ago

I saw President Obama discussing this yesterday during a press conference.   Talking about cuts, cuts, cuts.  Tugging at our heart strings on what will be cut and in a crazy ass way.  One of the cuts that stood out to me was cuts to Medicare.

You know, until the day they deal with people like Dr. Melgen and Senator Menendez, I don't want to hear anything about cuts to Medicare.  It's just insulting.



This post was modified from its original form on 20 Feb, 12:07
2 years ago

Yeah, and I almost have to agree with Boehner, much as I hate to do so, that it is a sign of Obama's leadership.

2 years ago

I can see it now a new deadline for a month or two away will be set and then the drama can begin again.  Or the cuts will happen and President Obama can blame it on the republicans.  All a big game, finger point and resolve nothing.

2 years ago

Then the republicans can blame Obama.

Back and forth.

Like a tennis match.

Hope and change = Shyte and same old

2 years ago




The GOP or whats left of it.....
2 years ago

Honestly  Bohener  and  Obama  could  work a  deal.......but  there are to  many  wackos  in  the  Republican  House,,not  possible,,,,,,The  Republicans  stance  to  deal  with  this  harms  America  in many  ways.........they  are  dysfunctional.....

My  guess, is  we  will  see  this "Sequester".....  when  the  reality  strikes   there  will  be  an  uproar......lots of  manifestations  of  the  GOP thinking  that leadership  is  their  abiltity to  say  NO

I am familiar  with  the  DoD  issues on  this  first  hand.....especially  the  Naval  ones.......whats  going  to  piss  people  off  is  TSA  FAA  and  later  DoA....I'll  address  the  alphabest  sou  if  needed  for  anyone  who  who  asks  nice  with  no  shrill  in the  post

leadership  is  not  just  saying  no  its putting  forth a  plan  and  talking  reasonably

Too  many  nuts  on  the  right....

2 years ago

equally so on the left....

There is not a willingness to work together period.  It takes two to tango.

Leadership  

What is the plan?  Do any of them have a plan?  What's President Obama's plan?

I think they just like drama...

hmm
2 years ago

Senate Democrats have  proposed a plan so  yes  there  is a a basis......

Also  the  Obama plan of continuing  current  funding  was  rejected this  would  avoid the current  Draconian  cuts

so yes  there  are  Democratic plans  on the  table........The GOP  responce  is  our  way  or t he  highway America be  damn**

The current  issues are  not a  result  of  smart  policies or  better  leaner  policies  they  are a symptom of a dysfunctional group  with the power  to  say  "NO"

2 years ago


"The left"? Who are "the left"? The US has no left-wing party in power.

2 years ago

Enlighten me Michael to the democrat plan please.

Enlighten me to President Obama's plan please.

Maybe then we can see if it is just a matter of NO or if possibly there is a reason for NO.

An actual budget being put together would be nice.  However, we haven't had one of those in years so....



2 years ago

Christian do you ever get bored asking that stupid ass question.  C'mon you been around long enough to know American terminology.  Seriously.....B O R I N G

2 years ago


Do you ever get bored using the same terminology incorrectly, time after time? Americans don't get to redefine words. Words mean what they mean, nothing else. The Socialist Party USA is a left-wing party. The NDP of Canada is a left-wing party. The Democrats are middle of the road at best. Referring to the Democratic Party as "the left" is ignorant. You really need to get a clue. Try traveling to another country someday, and you'll see what I mean. Try telling people in Venezuela that Barack Obama is a socialist. They will laugh you out of the country.

It is my firm belief that you don't even know the definition of the word "left."

2 years ago

Christian, you don't get to define American terminology.  You really need to get a clue.

Quite honestly, I don't give a flying fuk what anyone thinks of the way we speak.  We all know what we're talking about.  You don't like it, don't listen.  Just for your information when I say left, it doesn't have anything to do with socialism.

Ignorant is constantly coming to a conversation with nothing to offer accept insults and not much else at all.

It is my firm belief that I don't care what you think I know or don't know.  Who cares?

2 years ago

One more thing, what the hell do you even know of where I have traveled or been.  You don't, so why go there?  It's just ignorant. 

Hi Suzanne
2 years ago

Hi Suzanne well you  could  have  checked  yourself  but  happy  to, but  first remember  the  Republican  first priority is  not  American jobs,  not  American Security, Certainly  not  the  health of  Americans,  it is (present tense used deliberately) defeating President Obama, well  they  lost  but    but seem  to have missed  the  election results, America rejected  their  ideas, but to  refresh  everyone’s  memory  here are the GOP “statesmen”: (they provide a   statement  as  to  why  we  are  in  this  mess)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nrD1Rl3C4c

 

As for the Democrats in the Senate here is the summery of the plan they presented,

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/14/us-usa-fiscal-cuts-idUSBRE91D1JB20130214

This is a summary of the President’s plan,

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/15/obamas_37_trillion_budget_calls_for?gclid=CMLVwdeyxrUCFe4-MgodPF4AoQ

So yes there are plans on the table, we Democrats just need some adults to talk with

2 years ago


Suzanne cares little for facts. It's true.

2 years ago

Michael, I can look it up just like you did or I could discuss it from my own view on what I know or don't know.  I figured you could do that in  your own words since you praise the plan. 

Personally, I don't see much of a great plan coming out of any of them.  I'll look over the stuff you put up tomorrow.

As for now, I am checking out for the evening.  Care2 has the hiccups and I got stuff to do.



we Democrats just need some adults to talk with


Yeah, that's not childish.  

2 years ago

Oh there's Christian being ignorant again...  It's good to have continuity.

Nite nite boys...

2 years ago


<<Just for your information when I say left, it doesn't have anything to do with socialism.>>

Which is exactly the problem. Yes, it is possible to be somewhat left and not be socialist, but the Democrats aren't located in that area of the political spectrum. Just because you think they are, just because you've been told that by someone else who doesn't know, doesn't make it so.

It is obvious that you haven't travelled to many places outside the US or travelled very often, because you would have more of a clue if you had. Going on vacation one or two times to some touristy destination in the Carribean doesn't really count much. You haven't lived or worked in Europe or South America or any other place. You haven't used the education or health care systems of any of those places, you haven't had long, meaningful conversations with any of the locals there about anything political (or anything else) ... in short, 99.9% of your life experiences are rooted firmly in one spot of one country. You hardly get to redefine a term that is used worldwide and that has specific meaning based on a life experience that limited in scope.



This post was modified from its original form on 20 Feb, 19:16
2 years ago


Also, Michael is right. The Republicans are acting like childish 'tards yet again, and as usual.

Failure to see that is called complete denial.

2 years ago


we Democrats just need some adults to talk with


yep here  are  your  adults,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nrD1Rl3C4c


I'm being  nice  I left Sarah  and  Herman, Mitt and Gov Perry  out........of  the  examples....

2 years ago

Well, for those who don't have time to check MIchael's links, here is, from first link, a summary of the video:

 

Published on Jul 23, 2012

Republican Senate Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell and other Republican leaders have stated that defeating President Obama, makiing his a one-term President, is the number one Republican priority. To achieve this goal, Republicans attempt to defeat President Obama's proposals, or as Senator DeMint says make it his Waterloo. Republicans also contend that they want to get the economy moving again. This creates a priority conflict. If the economy improves, Obama's chances for re-election also improve. If the economy fails to improve or gets worse, Obama's chances for re-election diminish. Therefore, Republicans must choose between mutually exclusive priorities: the patriotic priority to improve the economy or the partisan priority to defeat Obama. Based upon their obstructionist tactics to date, it seems likely that Republicans are willing to sacrifice economic improvement and the well-being of Americans in the hope of defeating Obama and electing Romney.

 

The election has come and gone, but nothing from the GOP has changed. Senators like McConnell should no longer be receiving a paycheck.  This is irresponsible.  These are my words - not youtube's.




This post was modified from its original form on 21 Feb, 1:22
2 years ago

Michael I looked through what you posted.  Actually watched the video twice, since you posted the same video twice, which does not directly have anything to do with a detailed response for sequestration from anyone.  It just relays something from a while back.

I have to ask you, do you support the very limited information in the other articles?   Such as cutting heating assistance programs to those in the Northeast.  I can tell you over the months of December and January, my heating and electric totalled just under $1,000.  I guess I shouldn't have put on those Christmas tree lights.  Maybe I should lower my heat to 64 from the 68 I keep it at.  I don't get assistance and could really use it but don't qualify.  I can't imagine how those that do qualify would make out.

The information you  provided is not really much detail at all.  Is there actually a detailed plan out there.

Unlike you, I see game playing on all sides of this.  Unrealistic proposals that could never be agreed to one way or the other.

President Obama put this sequestration in place as a way to force an agenda.  A bluff.

I think the bluff is being called whether right or wrong.  No matter who suffers.  Just part of the game playing of Washington.


Angelica, what you put up has nothing to do with what I asked Michael at all.  Not surprising.

2 years ago

Christian, I have no response to you trying to detract from the topic of this thread.  My personal tavels and dealings with people are none of your damn business or anyone else's here for that matter.  To assume you know a life led by another on an on-line forum is quite assinine indeed.

2 years ago

"Hope and change = Shyte and same old"

It is certainly turning out that way. 

Corporatism, corporatism, corporatism. 

2 years ago

""The left"? Who are "the left"? The US has no left-wing party in power."

Christian, it is true that we have no real left wing in power.  But we do have a right and a left within the confines of our fairly narrow politics.  Thus, calling it "the left" is legitimate. 

2 years ago

Nancy....You ignorant _ _ _ _ 

2 years ago

I love when the videos come out cherry picking statements.

Do you believe them when they show Democrats saying stupid shite? Do they sway your opinion?

I'll answer for you; no, you don't. So why do you pass around that garbage..?

2 years ago


<<Christian, it is true that we have no real left wing in power.  But we do have a right and a left within the confines of our fairly narrow politics.  Thus, calling it "the left" is legitimate.>>

Not really. If the Democrats, who are actually somewhere in the middle, are now considered "left," what does that make the real left in the rest of the world? You don't get to redefine that term to include only a miniscule collection of people in only one, single country on a planet containing around 200 countries with a combined population of 7 billion people.

Salvador Allende was a leftist. Che Guevara was a leftist. Barack Obama is not a leftist, nor is Hillary Clinton, nor is anyone else in the American Democratic party.

2 years ago

Oh Buck, you are so childish. 

2 years ago

Christian, when we are discussing it only in terms of American politics.  Yes we can

2 years ago

"Nancy....You ignorant _ _ _ _  "

My mother meant to name me Jane?

2 years ago

"You don't get to redefine that term to include only a miniscule collection of people in only one, single country on a planet containing around 200 countries with a combined population of 7 billion people."

We do get to describe our own poliitcs and its sides the way we want.

2 years ago

Angelica, what you put up has nothing to do with what I asked Michael at all.  Not surprising.


Oh no, I think it does.  Michael went to the trouble of finding links for you and then you told him you didn't have time to read them.  So, I posted the video summary from youtube because I thought that would be helpful.  You could read that for starters.

2 years ago

Really Angelica.

This is what I said...

I'll look over the stuff you put up tomorrow.

As for now, I am checking out for the evening.  Care2 has the hiccups and I got stuff to do.


Do you know how to read or is it you just like to make up what you want to about what people say?  I was looking for the great plan that the democrats have out there.  The plan, the actual details.  Michael talks about it like he knows.  I just thought he would share what he knows.  I never asked him to provide links.  I can look up stupid ass shyte that gives you no real answers too.  I was looking for discussion on the democrat plan because honestly I don't know what exactly that is.

I realize now there will never be discussion only silly crap.  Not much unlike congress.

Personally, I read what you put up to.  However, it has nothing to offer with regard to sequestration.

By the way, are you trolling my thread?  Boy that makes me angry



This post was modified from its original form on 21 Feb, 16:07
2 years ago


Wow, Suzanne sure gets into some major hissy fits when Angelica is around.


Suzanne---> 


Have a Xanax, Suzanne.
 



This post was modified from its original form on 21 Feb, 16:29
2 years ago


Nancy, your political system doesn't have two sides. You have a middle (which is not a side) and a right side. That's it.
 
 

2 years ago

 We clearly do have two sides Christian.  It is as clear as the nose on my face.  Or your face.  If we didn't, we wouldn't have such a mess in Congress.

2 years ago

Christian, that's because I am the angriest person on Care2 blah...blah...blah...

Ask Angelica, she'll tell you.

It doesn't have anything to do with the fact that she makes up shyte you are supposed to have said.

2 years ago


And both of them are corporate-controlled, with very little difference between the two. Some countries have upwards of six or more parties in power, anywhere from hard left all the way to hard right, some sharing power by forming coalitions. You have nothing remotely like that in the US. There is nothing resembling a left-wing party in power.

 

2 years ago

Wow, are we getting our threads mixed up.  You are right.  This one is about the sequester, not the conspiracy theories.  I am getting so confuzed.

2 years ago

Christian, I don't do prescription drugs...too expensive

2 years ago


Suzanne, you are the top-acme-pinnacle-apogee-queen of making shite up.



 



No one is better at it than you.
 

2 years ago

Really Christian ...Show me.

This is my favorite post directed at me ever...
2 years ago

Suzanne, I think you are one of the angriest people on care2.  And you are always disrupting the discourse to get people to address your feelings.  Like now.  This happens every single time we are all here, posting our thoughts and ideas.  You disagree with me?  Okay.  Fine.  No problem. My comments weren't  even directed at you.

I am beginning to think that, because you hate Christian so much, you are trolling his threads.  Misplaced anger, name calling, and then whining about how you have been hurt by the views of others are your methods of disruption. It's childish.   Angelica


Yup...


2 years ago


Yup, indeed. 
 

2 years ago


My impression of Suzanne ... ready? ... here I go ...









Yup.
 

2 years ago

So Christian I am waiting to see what I made shyte up about. 

2 years ago

I do remember that post by Angelica.  It is true.

2 years ago

Yup...

2 years ago


I'm busy editing photos of electric and hybrid cars. No time for you.
 

suzzane
2 years ago

Hi Suzanne

The budget is a pretty  huge  document but  since  you  asked  I’ll  pass  on  the material I  look at, first  is  the  CBO budget assessment:

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-16-APB1.pdf

This is the President’s proposed Budget:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/budget.pdf

 

Both are huge documents I actually do read parts of them, my interest lies in DOD.  As  you  requested details  they are  easy  enough to provide just a  lot  to  read  through.

The current  issue  is  that  shortly  with no Budget we will be  entering “Sequester” The GOP seems  to  be  pretty  happy  campers  about  this, Rand Paul  says we  need  more  cuts  beyond  this.  These folks  are  juts  nuts, there is  no rational  basis  for  this, it is a sysptom of dysfunction more  than policy

The fundamental problem with sequester is it  will  harm our  national security and  cause  some  major  problems in the  economy, so yes the GOP does  need  to  quit  acting like spoiled brats having a temper tantrum act  like  adults  and  work on the budget.

2 years ago

I agree with you Michael that it is a symptom of dysfunction over policy.  I also feel though that as I said before it takes two to tango.  I am not prepared to lay this at the feet of one side. 

I am going to look through your budget links.  I actually have become fairly good looking at budgets been doing it for years with our local government, board of ed, county and state budgets.  I am sure this is oodles and oodles of numbers and the nonsensical in a much larger scale.

I really was curious what your specific thoughts were and on what particular issues.  Apparently it is mostly DOD.  I don't know how true this is or not but I heard in actuality it is about one penny on the dollar this sequester will cut.  I would think those in charge should be able to adjust accordingly.  I know that these cuts, if they happen, come in a haphazard way without rhyme or reason though.

Honestly, I think it pathetic that we have gone for years without a budget.  The fiscal cliff and now sequestor  There is no excuse for this and both sides are to blame for this.  They are all game playing in very serious times with very serious consequences.

I think the drama of every event in Washington is less than desireable and less than what we as citizens deserve.  As I said above, I am not prepared to lay this at the feet of one side.  I think that is what I take issue with the most.  They have really all been epic failures at working together.  It is not just about one party in my view.

I think looking at it to blame one side only does not make a clear picture of actual events.  Quite possibly playing into their desired reaction from us all.

Seriously, I will look through the budgets and see what it is exactly is being offered in cuts and revenue.  I don't think either side acts in a beneficial way to Americans with regard to those issue.  Unrealistic expectations from both sides, assuring failure. 

I think that is the goal.  Make each other look bad and never do what is right for our Country.

I know you don't see it that way.  You blame one side.  That is where my main difference lies with your thoughts.

Thanks for the info. though.



This post was modified from its original form on 22 Feb, 5:01
2 years ago

In an effort to understand the Presidents budget, democrat budget and republican budget being offered.  I needed to see what the Republicans had in mind along with the rest.

If interested you can go here:

http://budget.house.gov/fy2013prosperity/


Anyway, there is tons to pour through obviously, to which I have briefly touched upon and none really show cause and effect to those affected by cuts or taxation, so that remains out of the equation and in my view is important to the equation.  Nonetheless I will continue to look through all these budgets which many parts without benefit of certain information don't amount to much in coming up with an answer.

In all honesty, pouring through hundreds of pages of budget materials will take a very long time.  Especially, not having the benefit of being part of each area that put together their own budgets and having a staff and experts to assist.  I do plan to look through it though and see where numbers vary from side to side as my time allows.   Probably be done with it sometime in the summer   If that is even doable in all instances.


Anyhow, I stumbled across this article. 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/16/democrat-led-senate-votes-down-4-gop-budgets-for-1/


I thought it a perfect example of game playing by all.  Why not take the one republican plan that garnered the most votes and work from there?  President Obama did get tax increases in the fiscal cliff fiasco, maybe not enough to his liking.  Why don't these senators and congressman sit down and discuss what they can live with from each other? 

Game playing by all.

I think what I really wanted to know Michael is what bothered you the most specifically and you have given me that information as mostly being the DOD.  I know you said you work on behalf of the navy.  Do you mind my asking if that is as a defense contractor?  Just curious.

By the way, in the Presidents DOD section there is a part the refers to the nest of America, which clearly should be best of America.  I just thought it funny.  Stuck out like a sore thumb.  Makes me wonder who actually proofs or even reads these items. 






This post was modified from its original form on 22 Feb, 6:49
2 years ago

Nest?  Do we Americans have a nest?  Hahaa. 

2 years ago

I think we used to, but now...no so much

Suzzane
2 years ago

"Do you mind my asking if that is as a defense contractor?  Just curious."


What  does  that  have  to  do  with  this  discussion?  Just  Curious.... By the way I am not....







2 years ago

Michael, I didn't mean to offend or be nosey (even though that is exactly what my question was).  I know  you mention your involvement with the Navy.  I have never heard you say you were an active military member, so I just wondered in what capacity you were active.  Really was a matter of curiousity only.

Thank you for answering it though.

2 years ago


And that's supposed to make a difference? So if Michael was ex-military, suddenly you're going to take him more seriously than if he wasn't?
 

2 years ago



O say can you see, by the dawn's early light ... "



 



'Murica.
 

2 years ago


merica-pew-pew.jpg



This post was modified from its original form on 23 Feb, 0:42
2 years ago


And that's supposed to make a difference? So if Michael was ex-military, suddenly you're going to take him more seriously than if he wasn't?

Christian, you really are clueless.

2 years ago


Don't gimme that, Suzanne. I know how you guys operate. Doesn't matter what the subject is. If it's a military guy talking, it's all, "Yes, Sir! I know what you mean, Sir! I agree, Sir! And by the way, thank you for your service to our country!"

Example:
 

Military guy: "Man-made global warming is real. I saw the effects of it with my own eyes, during my three tours of duty in eye-raq. Our boys did tests and they confirmed the data."
 

Right-wing Care2 member/Teabagger/whoever: "Well you're in the military, so you should know! I'm selling my SUV tomorrow! Damn those left-wing libtards on the left for not warning us! By the way, thank you for your service to our country!"

 




Or ...

 

Military guy: "Man-made global warming is just a scam cooked up by the libtards on the left and their scientist buddies who are only scare mongering so they can grow rich and fat off research grants. I know it for a fact because I caught them doing it during one of my three tours of duty in Afghanistan."


Right-wing Care2 member/Teabagger/whoever: "Well, if anyone knows, it would be you, because you're in the military! Those libtard bastards on the left! I KNEW it! I'm buying an SUV tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up, but more importantly, thank you for your service to our country!"
 



This post was modified from its original form on 23 Feb, 8:40
2 years ago

No, actually it relates to his work status with the DOD and his concern over this sequestration in this regard.

Nice try though...

2 years ago

I understand.  As a scientist I am aware that NIH grants are being funded at less than 9%- inclduing renewals 9which used to be almost automatic as long as you published).

As a sister-in-law of a "Rocket Scientist" , I am also aware of cuts to the space program.  At least my borther-in-law has a job.  Most of his colleauges (contractors- not full NASA employees) have been laid off.  He was hired back as a new employee with no seniority, no vacation, and far less pay. 

There has to be some kind of balance and understanding that these cuts do lay people off who then are unemployed- adding to the numbers.  Though some on the right are happy to see those numbers increase as a sign of just how bad Obama is without realizing (or perhpas acknowledgin) that the Republicans in Congress are just as complicit.

Personally, Obama should have never approved pay raises for himself and Congress. 

2 years ago

Though some on the right are happy to see those numbers increase as a sign of just how bad Obama is without realizing (or perhpas acknowledgin) that the Republicans in Congress are just as complicit.

And vice versa...they all share a part.

2 years ago


This is my favourite part: When it's just the Republicans up to no good, it's, "But they ALL do it. It's ALL of them, not just the Republicans."
 

2 years ago

Truthfully, I don't know that Dems are trying to lay people off.  As a matter of fact, the ACA has opened up new training programs and new job opportunities for people in the medical field.Obama has offered tax incentives to corporationsthat return home to manufacture.


 I fail to understand the GOP attacks on the post office, which is self-sustaining through the sales of stamps,  and government employees in general.  Nancy is right.  When government workers are laid off, it raises the unemployment rate.  And Obama is not going after government employees.    

2 years ago

"And vice versa...they all share a part."

Not disagreeing.

"And Obama is not going after government employees.    "

True- only contractors such as my brother in law.  Amnd despite the cliams that government workers make so much moeny,  I can tell you that contractors, at least in science and technology do make more.  In fact, my brother in law may be back down to government workers pay rate now after his significant pay cut.  Does it matter- he has a job and they are fien.  It might matter if they had kids in college.  For them it doesn't matter.  But it is a great deal less money to put into the local economy, which in the coast of the space coast has been decimated. 

Yeah, other places have been too.

2 years ago

I am sorry about your brother-in-law.  Why is that?  I would think that contractors, who hire many people, would be sought after to help get the economy rolling.  

I don't like the rollbacks at NASA.  That's scientific knowledge we seek via NASA.  I think we should keep NASA in full swing.  As a scientist, what do you think, Nancy?

I have no objection to some government workers earning more.  To be employed in the science and technology fields, you need to have invested a lot of time and money into your education to become highly skilled.  These workers should get paid more. 

2 years ago

Becuase NASA is getting less and less funding. 

   

As a scientists, I am shocked at how littel science we actually do anymore.  Of course, you might have to believe in evolution in order to actually want some sicence in the US.  (sarcasm).

 

Scientists do it because they love it- not for anything else.  After all that time, it is truly a slpa in the face. 

 

Of course others have also been slapped in the face.



This post was modified from its original form on 23 Feb, 17:09
1 year ago

Well, I wasn't really talking about anyone loving laying people off.  I honestly don't think having people out of work is necessarily the main reason for making cuts.  Sometimes you honestly can do better or just as well with less people doing the work. 

It is unfortunate, but it is true.  There is a lot of government overlap and waste and that means some people probably are not necessary to get the job done as effectively.  Private sector has been downsizing due to technology taking over peoples jobs, cost savings, outsourcing, need based for a long time now.


I have two immediate family members that will be directly affected if this occurs on March 1st.  To what extent no one knows right now.  Furloughs may occur, maybe put them on 4 day work weeks.  These cuts can be less offensive if thought out and applied accordingly.  Or we can have major drama and stop the government from operating.

We will have to see what takes place.

For some reason my gut tells me, much like the fiscal cliff there will be a late night phone call or meeting and all will be pushed down the line once again for another day.

No matter what it is drama, drama, drama...

As an example...  President Obama in a speech he gave earlier this week was referring to teachers, police, fire being cut.  I am not sure how other states do it, but does the federal government hire, pay, employ the above?  In Jersey, each town handles their own.  If this occurs we will not be affected in these areas.  That's what I mean about drama.  It is not true.  It is a scare tactic.  Personally I am sick of all the scare tactics.  I want straight up and honest.



This post was modified from its original form on 24 Feb, 5:39
1 year ago

I think that a lot of the time - not always - but a lot of the time, corporate greed is what drives lay offs.  There is a reasonable expectation of profit, and then there are insatiably greedy CEO's who drive their companies into the ground while taking the profits out of them.  The Mitt Romney - venture capitalist kinds of CEOs start out by laying people off.  Then there are the jobs outsourcers who were making reasonable profit here in the USA.  They learned that they could essentially have slaves in third world countries and keep most of the profit at the top.  18 cents a day doesn't really count as salary in America.  For too long, we have been rewarding corporate greed at the expense of workers in this country. 

1 year ago

"Well, I wasn't really talking about anyone loving laying people off.  I honestly don't think having people out of work is necessarily the main reason for making cuts.  Sometimes you honestly can do better or just as well with less people doing the work.  "

Suzanne, I understand that.

I could definitely see that at the EPA.  It was crazy.  Two or three acting as "bosses" with conflicting information from them,  No trainign for new hires so they ONLY TRSUTED the original workers thus increasing their workload, new hires feeling they had nothing to do,  claims of not enough time to do all the work and not enough work getting done (it was pathetic), anbd continual claims of we need more staff.  What they neede was better leadership, fewer people, and a more streamlined process to train and get the workd one.

"I think that a lot of the time - not always - but a lot of the time, corporate greed is what drives lay offs."

Absolutely true.  In the US (and not necessarily elsewhere), salaries and bonuses are tied to profits.  You have more profit if you lay-off people and by doing so, you ensure your bonus.  That is respect to those "too big to fail" companies that have been ruining America.

If Walmart can't hire full-time workers and can't provide benefits to its low-end employees, then  IMHO, managment is a failure and should be gottten rid of.  Remember that we really are subsidizing Walmart by providing at the very least food stampts and in some cases other benefits.  We should send the bill to Walmart.

In any case, this is slightly off on a tangent.

I suspect you are right Suzanne, tthat the can will be kicked down the road.

However, I do see it as a failure of Obama to not be a good enough leader to deal with this.  He seems to be relying on the outrage of Americans to do the dirty work of contacting our Congress people rather than being more direct.

On the other hand, my original point is that this is EXACTLY what the republicans in Congress want and why it will happen.  They do want to see Obama fail and will do whatever they can to ensure that goal.

ANd the dems are failures for not having a unified voice and dealing with it.

Suzanne
1 year ago

As an example...  President Obama in a speech he gave earlier this week was referring to teachers, police, fire being cut.  I am not sure how other states do it, but does the federal government hire, pay, employ the above?


The answer is Yes Suzanne, and yes those areas will  be affected, there is an exception in the law for protecting directly life and property but not much else except  for Senior Political apointees

So yes the President is corrrect..   There will  be  some  immediate issues affecting our Military, (not supporting our troops in combat as best we can), over the long term even more so, the latter  has a bittler irony as during the Romney effort to ne President he and mnay in the GOP were staunchly sayingthe President was weak on defence and advocating an increase well above  what  the  Pentagon said it nneded, now with their Political games the GOP seems  quite  happy to  put into effect a 10% acrosss the  board cut to DoD in a very foolish way, 

1 year ago

MIchael, in my list above I didn't mention military.  Are you saying that my list will have firings.  I am trying to figure out how so.  My property tax bills support those areas, along with some state aid, very small for my town and I would imagine some federal aid in an even smaller amount.  Those listed above are not federal employees.

As far as the military, yes I suppose some lay-offs will happen along with other areas of government, not necessarily right off the bat though.   I hope they are preparing to do the best they can if this comes about.


Nancy, my response was to other posts here not yours. 

As far as President Obama, I read he hasn't even tried to reach out to anyone since the cliff fiasco.  I also think when he goes out and speaks to the public, he speaks very one sidedly as do the republicans.  Therein the lies the problem, no give, no take, no negotiation.

I still stand by they are all epic failures.

To me, corporations are not the issue with sequestration.   This is purely a failure  Is there a valid effort from the other side though either.

1 year ago

"Nancy, my response was to other posts here not yours."

Understood- just giving an example for others. 

"As far as President Obama, I read he hasn't even tried to reach out to anyone since the cliff fiasco."

Some dems this morning were saying he had.  I don't believe it really though.  Maybe in a superficial sense but he certainly hasn't sat down with them, rolled up his sleeves and worked on it together. 

Suzanne
1 year ago

Suzanne,

You are incorrect there are Federal employees who are teachers, and yes they will be facing this issue and more importantly so will their students.

I cannot speak to the effect on your local school district; it is quite possible that some of the teachers there have some Federal funds involved in their employment.

One of the mist shameful cuts will be in “Head Start”, it is in my opinion of the best programs the Federal movement can help fund; studies have well documented the positive lifelong effects of early childhood education.  This program will  be  cut, a very heart wrenching process decking  which  students will no longer be able to attend, this may of  course have a ripple  effect on t he  parents and their home/work situation as they develop child care options.

Defense may not be on your list but it is on mine, you are incorrect yes there will be immediate layoffs.

More importantly we will not be giving our troops who are at war the best support we can both in logistics and actual combat support, this is nothing short of shameful in my opinion.

Americans may disagree on the policies which have led us to war, but fundamentally American until now have agreed to support the  troops on  the  battle field the  best way we can.

1 year ago

I don't know Michael, while I agree the situation is not good.  I don't see it as the world will end and I am fairly sure this will all be resolved.

I absolutely have concerns that our active military will be affected.  I don't think that will happen.

I think the teacher, police, firefighter thing might be a state by state deal.   I really don't see any of ours in this state losing their job.


Nancy, I read it. doesn't mean I believe it 100% or not. 

You know, I have never gone after the president or his family ever, any of our presidents, with regard to the vacations they take.  I just always felt it was a silly point to bring up in the bigger scheme of things.  However, I will say President Obama should have been in Washington trying to get some work done rather than playing golf with Tiger and his oil buddies.

I mean the sky is falling and he is in Florida golfing.  That does nor reflect honest intent to get to a solution or very good leadership in a time of crisis.  Really poor judgement to do so in my view.

I am just so sick of all their bullsyhte.  They all prefer the blame game rather than working.



This post was modified from its original form on 24 Feb, 14:48
It Happened
1 year ago

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/06/pentagon-to-cut-aircraft-carrier-presence-in-persian-gulf-to-1-due-to-budget/

Suzanne, it has already happened, we normally  have  two  carriers in the  gulf, now its  one, I could cite a more credible news source but Fox is listed above.  So we have troops  with half the Naval assets they normally  have.......Senator McCain to his credit is in an uproar over this, but generally  the GOP is  quiet, Rand Paul says more of  this  is  good......

The  Pacific in terms of Naval presence is less clear right now, there are other factors there, 

We have though a rogue state there setting off Nuclear weapons and making bellicose threats, so yes in my opinion this nonsence is not good for our  Nations Security.

As for  your  statement:

I think the teacher, police, firefighter thing might be a state by state deal.   I really don't see any of ours in this state losing their job.


I hope not at well, but one  needs to look at  the  reality.....



This post was modified from its original form on 24 Feb, 15:03
1 year ago

Agreed with what you say Suzanne.  And I know that you never have gone after him.  He is definitely not on top of this the way I think he should be.

Teachers?  I don't know how it works here.  All states do get federal moeny and I don't know how much freedom they have to do what they want with it.  Does it go to salaries?  Or, as it is cut back, will the board then have to make tough decisions and end up firing more teachers.  I don't know.  I do know that due to porperty tax cust maybe four or five years ago, many schools laid off about 40% of their teachers.  Not good.

1 year ago

Wasn't it President Obama during the debates who commented on the downsizing of our Navy.  Wasn't it a big joke he made at that time?  I really forget what that was all about exactly.

Isn't this what the liberals have been calling for all along downsizing our military?  That these threats are not real.  Just republican blather for more war.


I think if this does happen, that there will be flexibility in where they can cut or not.

I know it is a serious matter, but I resent all the hype that flows with it.

1 year ago

Nancy, my taxes go up every year for teachers health care and raises.  The only time they get fired or laid off is, if, as an example, a first grade level had 5 classes with 100 kids, but the upcoming classes will only have 80 kids causing an actual overage of teachers per grade.

The unions will protect them or they will raise our taxes.  That is what I see for Jersey, can't speak for elsewhere.

This is the comment I referred to...
1 year ago

“But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these shipsthat go underwater, nuclear submarines.”



I am not sure this was fair to put this in with the sequestration issue.  So I will withdraw that comment.
1 year ago

I kind of liken this to owning a business.  Sometimes you don't have a choice but to make really hard decisions in order to keep the ball rolling.  Things happen that make you have no choice but to cut something out.  You pick that which enable you to still operate in accordance with law and efficiency.

Yea, it sucks and it's hard and people suffer.  Yet, you do it because there is no other choice.  Life rolls on.

1 year ago



This post was modified from its original form on 24 Feb, 16:23
What a difference a day makes...
1 year ago
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.  It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills.  It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.  Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally.  Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.'  Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.  America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.  Americans deserve better." 

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006 



They all play and play while we pay the price...



This post was modified from its original form on 24 Feb, 16:27
1 year ago

You know what, President Obama, was right then and now.  I agree with him 100%.


I would say 2006 is a good time frame when the shyte really started hitting the fan with our business personally.  I blame alot of it on State issues, but then there is the above...

1 year ago


Meanwhile, the Teabaggers crap all over the poor, blaming them for all of society's ills.
 

Suzanne
1 year ago

Wasn't it President Obama during the debates who commented on the downsizing of our Navy.  Wasn't it a big joke he made at that time?  I really forget what that was all about exactly.


Hi Suzanne, Well you  are parly  right, the President made that comment, his proposal was his current budget proposal, (which is in line whith what the Pentagon says it needs, we would not be in this mess if  that proposal was followed)  Romney at the time was advocating a huge in crease in  Defencce spending beyond what the Pentagon said they  needed, with the Sequester the GOP seems happy  with a huge and very foolish  cut on the order of 10%, they seem happy  with that  now, amazing what  politcal gamesmanship does to ones world view


As for this comment, "I think if this does happen, that there will be flexibility in where they can cut or not."  You are incorrect there is very little flexibility.   a couple  areas are  exempt as I shared above but its across  the  board for all  others, It  is  not  something I would  try to defend  it  is  something  which  needs  to be fixed, it is a foolish action.

1 year ago

I was listening to Senator McCaskill speak to this issue during the weekend and she said that they will act to mitigate the cuts.  Allowing a more flexible approach.  Let's hope the powers that be, if, these cuts come in to play do just that and affect the least the most important areas.


1 year ago

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/24/sequester-states_n_2755181.html?ncid=webmail8


This has a breakdown on how each state will be impacted.

For the record, I don't have a problem with closing up tax loop holes at all.  Personally, I think the whole tax code needs to be revamped. 

I still feel very strongly that this was put in place as a way to prevent discussion and push through whatever.  The bluff is called and now look what we have.  I still believe this can be a manageable situation and not such a sky is falling type of thing.

DRAMA....

1 year ago

I love it I am watching the news and President Obama is saying at some point we have to do some governing.  This after going through his scare tactic list.

I think he looks foolish for how he is acting and treating this matter.  Lead President Obama, get off your ass and lead.  You are the president.  Responsibility comes with that job.

I was watching George Stephanopoulis and his round table this weekend.  It boils down to two cents on the dollar, which it was pretty much agreed upon that if given some flexibility in where they can cut it is doable.

Stop the scare tactics and threats.  We deserve better. 

This is so stupid and I an starting to believe intended when put together.

They need a long weekend, the work is too hard...Idiots all of them!
1 year ago
1 year ago

Two cents on a dollar really is nothing. 

Idiots?   

1 year ago

With the federal government doubling in monetary size every decade, I think Obama has exposed a flaw in our system. A president, rather than being the executive--one who executes the laws passed by congress--has become one who decides which laws to enforce and how to spend money. Bush talked congress into doing stupid things; Obama just does them on his own. Once a monopoly like the United States government gets big enough, they will do all they can to protect their turf and it will be difficult to reverse the trend. It would be like trying to slow down the growth of an organism that has no competition.

 

A good example is in my state. A national park is closing all camping facilities. The reason? The sequester of course. One of our senators and his staff did a thorough analysis and decided that the adjacent state park could keep it open, use the state reservations system, state employess, and actually make money. I highly doubt the feds will give up control, but I love to see the states call the fed's bluff on things like this.

 

I would love to see the US government give up land and give it back to the states. Not likely. If they do this, they won't have much of the collateral needed to back up all the bonds they sell, and the house of cards will collapse.

1 year ago

Honestly, I think some of the things they are closing are just downright mean-spirited and petty and they are doing it onn purpose.

Camping, White House tours.  It is downright stoopid.

1 year ago

Harry Reid even brought up the marines who just died in a mortar training accident. As if mortars made before the sequester became defective afterwards. "These men and women, our Marines, were training there in Hawthorne and with the sequester it's going to cut this stuff back, and I just hope everyone understands sacrifices made by our military, they are significant." 

1 year ago

The entire situation makes me ill.  What a way to operate.

Nancy, I agree that they are trying to hurt people in the simplest pleasures we have.  This way it will hit us all at home.  Idiots...idiots...idiots...


Just got this email from the Chamber of Commerce...
1 year ago

Suzanne,

Earlier this month, the deadline to avoid sequestration came and went without Congress reaching a compromise to dodge across-the-board, arbitrary spending cuts.

The U.S. Chamber opposed the sequester cuts as bad public policy, and their negative impact is already being felt in certain industries. But comparing the $1.2 trillion cuts to our overall debt ($16 trillion) and wasteful spending that still takes place, makes you wonder if we couldn’t be more targeted about what needs to be cut.

Net interest payments to the debt alone will cost $5.41 trillion in the next ten years. So, we’ve come up with a few numbers to put this big idea into perspective.

sequestration by the numbers

In short, the sequestration adds up to cuts made haphazardly, in the wrong places.

Federal programs that didn’t necessarily need to feel pain were sacrificed at the expense of... calligraphers?

In the midst of budget season, we’re hoping that Congress can come up with a financial plan that will address our exploding debt, while getting our economy back on track.

This spending battle has just begun.

We’ll keep you posted.



This post was modified from its original form on 20 Mar, 13:31
1 year ago

Suzanne,

 

I agree, there are weird choices made. The DOE is still making loan guarantees to companies like Solyndra that will never be able to compete with China. It's interesting that all the leadership agreed on the sequester, it passed both House and Senate with the support of the president, and he signed it. Now all we hear about is how bad an idea it is.

 

I think we can limp along for a while as long as interest rates are kept low. If they rise, we may be screwed trying to service our debt. Obama's probably hoping by that time he'll be gone and someone else will have to fix it. Another possibility: we may have to accept the fact that there is no fix; this is the new norm. The global economy has been running on fumes and that can't be sustained.

 

I've been burned too many times to get back in the stock market and cash won't keep up with inflation. First I made it a point, Dave Ramsey style, to be debt free. I've been getting into real estate a little bit but that market could crash again. I should have listened to Beck and bought gold!

This thread is archived. To reply to it you must re-activate it.