Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Just some perspective on the dreaded sequester
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 18
| visibility 3

Just some perspective on the dreaded sequester


Feb 25, 2013, 11:29 AM

Our government is spending $3,700 billion. We're cutting $85 billion. That's 2% of government spending. Now how will this effect the economy? Well, the economy cranks out $16,000 billion a year. Assuming every penny of government spending goes straight back into the economy where it comes from in the first place(it won't), that's an impact of half of one percent on the economy. It's 8 DAYS of government spending.

What's really sad about this mess, is these huge, tremendous, economy shattering cuts will do next to nothing to solve our problem.

People are so clueless that they think government spending is money into the economy, and government cuts is money out of the economy. Every penny government spends is a penny taken out of the economy. Every debt penny the government spends is a penny that will have to be extracted from the economy at some point in the future. Every penny government doesn't spend, is a penny not taken out of the economy. And here's the problem with debt: debt is money inserted into the economy before it has been extracted from the economy. It is money the economy now owes the government. It IS a burden on the economy just as your credit card bill is a burden on you.

Obama is hyping the cuts because that's a loss of power. Money equals power in Washington and in most dysfunctional places. If these cuts go through, the ruse is over. Obama is going to do everything in his power to make sure these cuts are targeted as much as possible to have a maximum impact on the most voters. Closing Yellowstone would be a good example. Fire some teachers....that's 40 people effected directly for every teacher fired. If you cut 2% across the board, no one would notice, and Obama wants people to notice. He wants to think you can't live without him. And he is wrong.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/president-obama-faces-cliff-fatigue-in-latest-budget-fight/

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


What needs to be discussed is:


Feb 25, 2013, 11:32 AM

Medicare
Medicaid
Social Security

Discretionary spending doesn't amount to very much in the grand scheme of things.

Both parties are guilty of doing nothing about the big 3 entitlements.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg2006_ncaa_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I heaed Kucinich say those three were fine and stable...


Feb 25, 2013, 11:36 AM

No problems

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


They account for around 62% of federal spending, and are


Feb 25, 2013, 11:41 AM [ in reply to What needs to be discussed is: ]

climbing. But let's cut defense first, since they account for 18%.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Why not cut all of the above?***


Feb 25, 2013, 11:51 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Why not have a flat tax?


Feb 25, 2013, 12:06 PM

Votes. That's all you need to know.


Message was edited by: Tiggity®


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


fair tax***


Feb 25, 2013, 10:45 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Makes too much sense and eliminates buying votes.


Feb 25, 2013, 11:40 PM

In our perfect world, it would happen.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


well...


Feb 25, 2013, 11:45 AM [ in reply to What needs to be discussed is: ]

one party has passed a budget that does tackle all three entitlements. It remains to be seen what they would actually do with those ideas if their budget actually had a chance of becoming law.

At this point, however, Democrats are "conservative" with reference to the New Deal establishment, and Republicans are the reformers.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Just let me opt out of SS***


Feb 25, 2013, 11:52 AM [ in reply to What needs to be discussed is: ]



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-lakebum1-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I would love to.***


Feb 25, 2013, 12:09 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


you can opt out of medicare!


Feb 25, 2013, 10:48 PM [ in reply to Just let me opt out of SS*** ]

that's a start

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Aren't both sides making it out to be the apocalypse?


Feb 25, 2013, 11:38 AM

If it's not a big deal, then I can't figure out why both sides are so eager to blame the other for what amounts to eight days of government spending.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


the whole point of it was to be a big deal


Feb 25, 2013, 11:43 AM

so it's kind of counter-productive to the impetus towards reducing the deficit and (eventually) the debt to treat it as nothing. When the law was passed, the idea was to threaten every sacred cow so that nobody would want to just sit back and do nothing.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

which is why the Republicans were foolish to compromise...


Feb 25, 2013, 11:47 AM

Obama just campaigns and says whatever he wants and the press does not call him out on it.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


They don't want you to know how little of an impact those


Feb 25, 2013, 11:59 AM [ in reply to Aren't both sides making it out to be the apocalypse? ]

cuts will have in your daily life. Look at it this way. If the federal government balanced the budget tomorrow and did not spend a penny more than it takes in (impossible for everyone you ask), that would be a net negative impact of 10% on the economy. The net positive economic effect of the federal government on the economy is the debt it spends, money that it puts into the economy that it has not extracted. That's $1.7 trillion out of $16 trillion.

That's why democrats like debt spending so much. Every penny of debt spent is a percentage of control and influence. It IS a short term boost and it creates dependency, and that creates power. But, alas, that money will have to be extracted (with interest) over many years, and that same positive is actually a much worse negative in the long term. That's how it's viewed by the economy on a macro level.

The government has inserted $16 trillion into the economy that it has yet to extract from the economy. It will never get back to where it was no matter what any politician tells you. And that debt is costing over $200 billion annually in interest. Let's say we get out of this mess in say 30 years and pray that interest rates don't go up. On average, every working American will work an extra YEAR in the next 30 just to repay what the government has already spent. If you look at it that way, the whole problem is manageable. But nothing is manageable until we can balance our budget. And that means entitlements have to be cut.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I suppose it's just a matter of how that money gets spent.


Feb 25, 2013, 11:51 AM

Whether I spend it on things I want or the government spends it on things it wants. For example, I was at Costco the other day and they have a nice LG 55" TV. Flat screen, 1080p, 3D. All for just $699. I could have bought that, thus supporting the economy in multitude of ways. Plus my old 50" TV would have been sold on Craigslist or given to Goodwill or something, thus helping someone else out. But I didn't pull the trigger. Now my kids are stuck watching a crappy old 720p projection TV. How do you think Spongebob looks on that?? Not very good, I can tell you.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I suppose it's just a matter of how that money gets spent.


Feb 25, 2013, 11:56 AM

http://www.tigernet.com/forums/message.jspa?messageID=13651838

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

you should have bought it and complained you dont have $$ to


Feb 25, 2013, 2:41 PM [ in reply to I suppose it's just a matter of how that money gets spent. ]

feed your family!

Same argument the government makes.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 18
| visibility 3
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic