"It Only Cuts 2%" Yes - All Of It From Only 1/3 Of The Budget, Which Is Why It's So D

[iamwhatiseem]

If we can't stop the sequester...I might not be back next week

 

[gipper]

 

[Rozman]

I heard that the traffic lights might stop working and there will be closures
of super markets and bodegas.Also all cigarette lighters will not work starting Friday night.

 

[Rozman]

Don't get me started on toilet paper failures....

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I stopped by today to stop this silly rumor that the sequester will stop us from using tax dollars to buy up your bad assets...I mean seriously folks...really?

 

[gipper]

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Yes, you heard right...although we might cut student funding the sequester will not affect your benefit package

 

[blackhawk]

Something people might find interesting at the first of the year we all saw the Social Security tax go from 4.2% to 6.2% a increase of 2% or to put it another way we all saw our paycheck or our budget if you prefer cut 2%. So we all had to adapt and adjust our budgets to compensate for that loss of income but Obama and the Democrats want to tell us that the federal government having to adapt and compensate for a 2% cut in revenue will cause nation wide Armageddon anyone else want to call bullshit on that claim?

 

[Erand7899]

The President said the Republicans would take my wheelchair if they don't reverse the sequester.

She won't need it, Paul Ryan is going to toss her over the cliff.

 

[Avatar4321]

it disrupts the cloward-piven strategy.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

it disrupts the cloward-piven strategy.

Should now be called the Obama-Reid-Pelosi strategy.

 

[editec]

"It Only Cuts 2%" Yes - All Of It From Only 1/3 Of The Budget, Which Is Why It's So Devastating

Let’s take a look at a common claim made by Republicans and then one program — Head Start — highlighted by the Obama administration. We will continue to dig into other claims later this week

“We’re only cutting 2.5 percent of the budget.”

Virtually all of the $85 billion in reductions are being made in the discretionary budget — which is only about 31 percent of federal spending. So this figure, cited by many Republicans, is based on the wrong-sized pie.

Discretionary spending must be funded year after year by Congress, whereas so-called mandatory programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and the like) are on automatic pilot unless Congress changes the law. The mandatory programs are largely untouched in the sequester — though Medicare providers must take a 2 percent haircut — even though projections show that mandatory programs are most responsible for the growth in spending.

In effect, that means one-third of the budget is carrying the burden of almost all of the cost reductions. And then on top of that, the cuts must be done in about half a year. Do the math — the percentages add up very quickly.

The Bipartisan Policy Center calculates that on the non-defense side, that translates into a reduction of 8 percent. Defense spending faces an even higher hurdle — 13 percent. Those numbers are significantly higher than just 2.5 percent.

Spin and counterspin in the sequester debate - The Washington Post

Yuppers.

You are absolutely right.

Congress does not have the DESCRETION to cut some parts of the budget.

Hence these cuts are all in that part of the budget where they CAN make cuts legally.

And as the DoD gets the lions share of that decretionary funding, the Dod gets the lions share of the cuts, too.