Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It works out to a 2% cut in spending.
I'm sure we can live through it.
Obama is just trying to scare you. That is a liberal tactic!
Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
According to Obama, the sequester would represent "a huge blow to middle-class families and our economy as a whole." Obama's White House has also referred to the sequester as "devastating," saying its cuts would "imperil our economy, our national security (and) vital programs that middle class families depend on."
Sounds frightening - but is it true? Of course not. According to The Wall Street Journal "federal domestic discretionary spending soared by 84 percent with some agencies doubling and tripling their budgets" during Barack Obama's first two years in office. In fact the sequester would scale back just one of every six dollars in discretionary spending increases since 2008 - hardly a "huge blow." Also, discretionary spending in 2008 was already tremendously inflated - having increased by more than 60 percent over the previous eight years.
In other words this isn't even really a cut - "devastating" or otherwise - it's a modest growth rate reduction following years of unnecessary, embarrassing and unsustainable excesses.
Read more: Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
I guess your job is not in jeopardy; it is a big deal to those who will lose their's. It must be nice to be so callous.
.BATH, Maine Hundreds of Bath Iron Works employees could be affected in the next six to nine months if the U.S. Senate fails to avert automatic spending cuts set to take place March 1, BIW President Jeffrey Geiger said Thursday at a news conference with U.S. Sens. Angus King, I-Maine, and Susan Collins, R-Maine.
The $85 billion in automatic spending cuts, also known as sequestration, which will be triggered if Congress doesnt reach an alternative agreement, also could prevent the U.S. Navy from being able to award contracts for subsequent DDG-51 ships that BIW is supposed to begin building later this year and in early 2014, Geiger said at the Bath shipyard.
Furthermore, If those ships dont get authorized and progressed through the system, then that number will grow significantly in 2014 and 2015 in terms of impact, Geiger said.
Obama is just trying to scare you. That is a liberal tactic!
Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
According to Obama, the sequester would represent "a huge blow to middle-class families and our economy as a whole." Obama's White House has also referred to the sequester as "devastating," saying its cuts would "imperil our economy, our national security (and) vital programs that middle class families depend on."
Sounds frightening - but is it true? Of course not. According to The Wall Street Journal "federal domestic discretionary spending soared by 84 percent with some agencies doubling and tripling their budgets" during Barack Obama's first two years in office. In fact the sequester would scale back just one of every six dollars in discretionary spending increases since 2008 - hardly a "huge blow." Also, discretionary spending in 2008 was already tremendously inflated - having increased by more than 60 percent over the previous eight years.
In other words this isn't even really a cut - "devastating" or otherwise - it's a modest growth rate reduction following years of unnecessary, embarrassing and unsustainable excesses.
Read more: Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
I guess your job is not in jeopardy; it is a big deal to those who will lose their's. It must be nice to be so callous.
I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
Obama is just trying to scare you. That is a liberal tactic!
Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
According to Obama, the sequester would represent "a huge blow to middle-class families and our economy as a whole." Obama's White House has also referred to the sequester as "devastating," saying its cuts would "imperil our economy, our national security (and) vital programs that middle class families depend on."
Sounds frightening - but is it true? Of course not. According to The Wall Street Journal "federal domestic discretionary spending soared by 84 percent with some agencies doubling and tripling their budgets" during Barack Obama's first two years in office. In fact the sequester would scale back just one of every six dollars in discretionary spending increases since 2008 - hardly a "huge blow." Also, discretionary spending in 2008 was already tremendously inflated - having increased by more than 60 percent over the previous eight years.
In other words this isn't even really a cut - "devastating" or otherwise - it's a modest growth rate reduction following years of unnecessary, embarrassing and unsustainable excesses.
Read more: Blog: 'Devastating' sequester cuts: True or False?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
I guess your job is not in jeopardy; it is a big deal to those who will lose their's. It must be nice to be so callous.
I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
Why would any job be lost if the budget is growing?I guess your job is not in jeopardy; it is a big deal to those who will lose their's. It must be nice to be so callous.
I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
Sequestration was created for that purpose, so jobs will be lost, imho.
A sweeping out of the old and in with the new (after this attrition phase) when the Republicans are once back in office.
That's my prediction.
Why would any job be lost if the budget is growing?I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
Sequestration was created for that purpose, so jobs will be lost, imho.
A sweeping out of the old and in with the new (after this attrition phase) when the Republicans are once back in office.
That's my prediction.
that means it is dishonest to say that sequestration will cause job loss, doesn't it?Why would any job be lost if the budget is growing?Sequestration was created for that purpose, so jobs will be lost, imho.
A sweeping out of the old and in with the new (after this attrition phase) when the Republicans are once back in office.
That's my prediction.
Jobs are both lost and gained in such transitions. So, some will be lost (regardless of a possible job growth/loss stasis from the event of sequestration, which I don't believe btw)
Even when one thing is growing, another thing can be lost. Different jobs will be gained. Some from the growing government and some from the private sector.
.BATH, Maine Hundreds of Bath Iron Works employees could be affected in the next six to nine months if the U.S. Senate fails to avert automatic spending cuts set to take place March 1, BIW President Jeffrey Geiger said Thursday at a news conference with U.S. Sens. Angus King, I-Maine, and Susan Collins, R-Maine.
The $85 billion in automatic spending cuts, also known as sequestration, which will be triggered if Congress doesnt reach an alternative agreement, also could prevent the U.S. Navy from being able to award contracts for subsequent DDG-51 ships that BIW is supposed to begin building later this year and in early 2014, Geiger said at the Bath shipyard.
Furthermore, If those ships dont get authorized and progressed through the system, then that number will grow significantly in 2014 and 2015 in terms of impact, Geiger said.
I guess your job is not in jeopardy; it is a big deal to those who will lose their's. It must be nice to be so callous.
I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
I too have a prediction, as long as the Congress continues to play political games the fewer Americans will invest in American companies or buy durable goods.
that means it is dishonest to say that sequestration will cause job loss, doesn't it?Why would any job be lost if the budget is growing?
Jobs are both lost and gained in such transitions. So, some will be lost (regardless of a possible job growth/loss stasis from the event of sequestration, which I don't believe btw)
Even when one thing is growing, another thing can be lost. Different jobs will be gained. Some from the growing government and some from the private sector.
Thank you for making My point.
Sequestration, another manufactured crisis brought to you by the United States Government.
I have a prediction, no one will lose their job because of the sequester.
I too have a prediction, as long as the Congress continues to play political games the fewer Americans will invest in American companies or buy durable goods.
Obama is playing the game here, not Congress. The sooner you see that, the better off you will be.
Everyone keeps going on and on about how spending cuts will hurt people and cause suffering so I have a simple question does anyone really think you can get out of a 16 trillion dollar debt without people getting hurt and suffering?
Not in the least bit. To say that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost and that government will have to chose between paying granny or cops all because the rate of growth is going to go down? Of course it is dishonest.that means it is dishonest to say that sequestration will cause job loss, doesn't it?Jobs are both lost and gained in such transitions. So, some will be lost (regardless of a possible job growth/loss stasis from the event of sequestration, which I don't believe btw)
Even when one thing is growing, another thing can be lost. Different jobs will be gained. Some from the growing government and some from the private sector.
Thank you for making My point.
Sequestration, another manufactured crisis brought to you by the United States Government.
Dishonest? Of course not. No one can say for sure. It's all opinions, manufactured or not.
I too have a prediction, as long as the Congress continues to play political games the fewer Americans will invest in American companies or buy durable goods.
Obama is playing the game here, not Congress. The sooner you see that, the better off you will be.
He's won this part of the game.
Not in the least bit. To say that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost and that government will have to chose between paying granny or cops all because the rate of growth is going to go down? Of course it is dishonest.that means it is dishonest to say that sequestration will cause job loss, doesn't it?
Thank you for making My point.
Sequestration, another manufactured crisis brought to you by the United States Government.
Dishonest? Of course not. No one can say for sure. It's all opinions, manufactured or not.
Obama is playing the game here, not Congress. The sooner you see that, the better off you will be.
He's won this part of the game.
He hasn't made a good move since he left the community organizer job. This country is in a bigger mess than when he took office.Not in the least bit. To say that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost and that government will have to chose between paying granny or cops all because the rate of growth is going to go down? Of course it is dishonest.Dishonest? Of course not. No one can say for sure. It's all opinions, manufactured or not.
He's won this part of the game.
Jobs are lost and jobs are created from different ideologies. He's in power and he's made some very good (powerful) moves.
Expect the changes whether you like them or not.
He hasn't made a good move since he left the community organizer job. This country is in a bigger mess than when he took office.Not in the least bit. To say that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost and that government will have to chose between paying granny or cops all because the rate of growth is going to go down? Of course it is dishonest.
Jobs are lost and jobs are created from different ideologies. He's in power and he's made some very good (powerful) moves.
Expect the changes whether you like them or not.
There is no need to stop the Sequestration. Hell, a slow down in growth is practically worthless, but it is something. Maybe they can get together and do that "fair and balanced' approach Obama was talking about by actually having the President live up to his word and cut (real cuts) some shit from the continuing resolution they currently use as a budget? Is it really to much to ask that they cut something?
There is no need to stop the Sequestration. Hell, a slow down in growth is practically worthless, but it is something. Maybe they can get together and do that "fair and balanced' approach Obama was talking about by actually having the President live up to his word and cut (real cuts) some shit from the continuing resolution they currently use as a budget? Is it really to much to ask that they cut something?
Let's try it like this.
Let's say this guy has a smoking problem. He goes to doctor and doctor tells him he has six months to live unless he quits smoking immediately. Guy says no. Doctor looks at him. "If you don't quit smoking I am going to fucking knee-cap you." The guy says, "Fine as long as I can keep smoking for another two years."
It's not going to be the grand liberal pipe dream that Obama alluded to either. Everyone is going to blame the other person for what anyone doesn't like about this.
