has anyone here actually been affected by

[dwalk]

the "Sequester"?


so far...from all the news media...there's, not yet, been any disastrous affects.


i understand that he so-called "Cuts" are actually from the planned increases.


we need a total revamp of congress' way of doing business...starting with terms limits for ALL.

[powderman]

We picked up a copy of the Ft Knox paper yesterday, THE GOLD STANDARD, and the front page was talking about a big reduction in supplies, training, civilian personnel, and readiness. Just what hussein wants, to weaken our military. The cuts haven't curtailed him or michelle though. POWDERMAN. 

[Empty Quiver]

If this country cannot manage the meager reductions called for then it is beyond repair. If we must stay at home and sit out the next civil war so be it.


We have a very effective military, I don't think it would strain us to leave several countries to defend themselves. Canadians readily admit we are their national defense. I am personally familiar with that statement, how many other countries does this apply to? A large reduction in active duty servicemen could be done if we cared to do it. The effort would need to be made to do it correctly. A tourniquet can stop a nose bleed but is not the proper way to proceed if the ultimate goal is to survive the malady.


Those at the center of sequestration have now and never have had any intention of it working. They fully intended for it to fail miserably and will do whatever necessary to insure its failure. They will happily burn the village to save it.


Alternatively the spineless bastards know good and well it is actually needed and fully intended to let it go through from the get go. Now that it is being implemented, all can say they had no part of it, and would sure like to work out a solution if only the other side would meet them.   


Whatever the real story I don't care. I'm happy to see some progress being made. This is only one bite out of an elephant that must be eaten before it spoils.

[kid_couteau]

Where I work some have been laid off

At the DFAS in our area people are being forced to take furlough days and they can not draw umemployment.

Spoke with a friend this morning.  He said they are sending breakfast food to their daughter in Afgahnistan or Iraq ,I forget which, because the military is no longer giving them breakfast.

Yup its hurting folks
Kid

[coyotejoe]

I agree that a 2% reduction in the projected rate of increase should not be a big problem and if we are ever to get a handle on spending there needs to be much much greater spending cuts. Of course any cut will affect somebody. Here is an article about Park Service cuts, some say deliberately aimed to maximize pain but others say not so. I suggest you read it all, not just the portion I have copied.Park ranger: Supervisors pushed  sequester cuts that visitors would seeBy Judson Berger
Published March 08, 2013
FoxNews.com

• AP

Another federal employee has come forward to claim the Obama administration  resisted efforts to ease the impact of sequester.
A U.S. park ranger, who did not wish to be identified, told FoxNews.com that  supervisors within the National Park Service overruled plans to deal with the  budget cuts in a way that would have had minimal impact on the public. Instead,  the source said, park staff were told to cancel special events and cut  "interpretation services" -- the talks, tours and other education services  provided by local park rangers.

Read more:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/08/park-ranger-claims-supervisors-pushed-sequester-cuts-that-visitors-would-notice/#ixzz2N4WePlOy

[mechanic]

Even with the reduction, the government agencies get more money than last year, with the exception of the department of defense, which already was getting cut.
 
Some of these agencies and those that run them are trying to maximize the pain caused to others so they can get more money.
 
While so many in the private sector have been having to cut for years, the government has continued to grow.
 
I hate for anyone to be cut...but if that's what it takes so be it.
 
We need about a 50% actual reduction in government.
 
Ben

[powderman]

Spoke with a friend this morning.  He said they are sending breakfast food to their daughter in Afgahnistan or Iraq ,I forget which, because the military is no longer giving them breakfast.

Yup its hurting folks
Kid

 
KID. A couple at Church is sending breakfast bars for their son and others too. Seems that hussein decided that fighting men and women do better on an empty stomach, makes em meaner and fight harder. No doubt the hussein klan also abstains. Thank a liberal today. POWDERMAN. 

[boomerralph]

A solution to big government:
Line up all non-military government workers.
Have them count off: 1-2-3...1-2-3...1-2-3
Draw a number out of a hat.
All with that number furloughed, laid off, fired or whatever you want to call it.
All remaining required to do 1/2 the work of one sent home.
If remaining do not want to comply, they join those sent home.
Hiring freeze for 5 years.
 
Government is instantly back to a more managable size, with no change in the amount of work being produced.
It's about time that government workers feel the pain that the rest of us are going thru.

[Empty Quiver]

Government is instantly back to a more managable size, with no change in the amount of work being produced.
It's about time that government workers feel the pain that the rest of us are going thru.

Preach it brother.


I have been getting myself sequestered now for a few years. Three years now of increasing hours on the road and the expectation that I do more tasks. By more hours I am talking about 15 - 18 hrs per week. This is to maintain the same gross wages. It cost me right at $11K to cut back to 62 hours a week, the same amount of hours I worked six years ago.


This new reality has been decades in the making.  Everyone needs to be sharing in the solution, government employees as well as government contractors. 

[BW56]

I'm a self employed machinist and truthfully it slowed down a bunch after 9/11. I'm tied to the electronics industry making molds for carrier shipping tape. Every part is improved/changed as soon as its put into production, so its still a good gig. Before they started screaming sequester i was told i could expect 13 jobs from one source as soon as a purchase order number came. I was told a day or two. I'm still waiting.

[yellowtail3]

Seems that hussein decided that fighting men and women do better on an empty stomach, makes em meaner and fight harder.

Seems you aren't very well informed, but you're sure of what appeals to you!

No doubt the hussein klan also abstains. Thank a liberal today. POWDERMAN. 

Klan? That's your gang, not Obamas...

[Swampman]

Quite a few are furloughed and let go in this area.  My buddy lost his job last week.  They are just getting strarted.  I believe my company will downsize.

[kennyd]

Work is slow making concrete equipment.  Neighbor is layed off for a "month".  What we don't know is how much of this weather and season related, and how much is from uncertaintly on what the government will or won't do.


I do know we need to rebuild a lot of bridges and maintain the pavment we already have.  I am not certain how much commuter rail Denver needs, or can use.  That is a whole different complaint; the imcomplatibility of light rail, heavy rail, busses, and where people actually need and want to go.

[Swampman]

Keep in mind that one in 5 works for the government either directly or indirectly.  That's a lot of people going hungry.  The domino effect will be huge.

[jimster]

Not affected really, just insulted by how dumb they think we are.

Keep in mind that one in 5 works for the government either directly or indirectly.  That's a lot of people going hungry. The domino effect will be huge.

The private sector went through this, I would say it's the governments turn. I think saying people will go hungry is being a bit dramatic, I notice poor people eat plenty in this country. Government employees can do what all those people in the private sector did (and are still doing), get unemployment, get food stamps, look for work elsewhere. I think they will survive like everyone else, and probably have plenty to eat, we are an obese nation to be honest. Government jobs should be cut back the same as private jobs/companies, we all shrank out here to get through it, it's tough, but has to be done.
We all have to share the burden of government inefficiency and lack of a budget. Not just private citizens. They can transfer money from thousands of things to keep the necessary government functions alive and well. If they don't do this, it's because they want to hurt people to prove a point, and you can bet they already have started that, once again, insulting our intelligence.
There has not been a real recovery yet, due to their policies, so everyone will feel the pain for a very long time. The money is gone and has been for a long time. The sequester was not really a cut, if they actually did what we really need to do, government would actually shrink instead of slowing it's growth by a penny or two.

[tobster]

I think a good first step would be to make politicians quit calling a reduction in the increase in spending a cut. I would venture if you asked people on the street what they thought was happening they would tell you government was reducing the amount of money they were spending.
 Another thing they seem to be good at is doing something that takes effect 10 years down the road. When boomeralph suggested gov.workers name off 1..2..3... I thought he was going to suggest something much more sinister  happen to the odd man out!

[Swampman]

There is no work in other places.  Some of you are out of touch.  Sitting in your easy chair drinking coffee listening to Fox News is a long ways from working a daily job.  The government will not suffer but working people will.  Fewer working people means higher taxes.

[Empty Quiver]

There is no work in other places.  Some of you are out of touch.  Sitting in your easy chair drinking coffee listening to Fox News is a long ways from working a daily job.  The government will not suffer but working people will.  Fewer working people means higher taxes.

More people working for government also means higher taxes, Swampy. There are necessary jobs working for the government. There is also waste, I will not believe waste is being eliminated until the budgets are reduced.

[Swampman]

I'd rather see us quit sending money overseas and keep it here at home.  The government has been eliminating jobs since the 1970s.

[Empty Quiver]

That is as good a place as any.


I believe the government tends to spend all the money it can get its hands on, not unlike myself, I am sorry to admit. If I spend my money I get what I want though. Are the goods and services I want any less valuable to the economy than those the government wants? A Raetheon employee might not have a job building weapons systems any longer. Does it really matter what Raetheon makes in the end?


Short term this thing will undoubtedly hurt people. Properly executed though, the long term outlook can be very positive.

[Swampman]

Commerical electronics will just move overseas.  Government contracts can't be built overseas.  Once all those companies are dead and gone who will build our weapons systems?  Our company tried to build some commerical stuff once but there's no money in it.  Similar government spec equippment sells for 10 times what commerical/police stuff does.

[Empty Quiver]

Commerical electronics will just move overseas.  Government contracts can't be built overseas.  Once all those companies are dead and gone who will build our weapons system?

It would not have to be that way Swampman. It very well could be.


I don't think we know what the Model T of the 21 century might be. Given the time and necessity to find a product the brilliant minds at these defense contractors could quite easily develop that thing that revolutionizes our lives. Maybe a free energy generator is not fiction, perhaps mining of the moon or mars is feasable. Just maybe we all need to live in mud huts and our wives need to haul water three miles each morning.   


If we are not willing to look for a solution we damned sure won't find one.

[Swampman]

The big shots will take their golden parachutes and walk away.  The little guys will be left homeless.  There's no incentive for the investors.

[magooch]

The cuts should start at the very top.  The White House budget (travel etc.) should be cut in half and at the same time some cabinet positions should be cut entirely and others should all have to be cut at least 10 percent.  All Congressional staffs and budgets should be cut by half.


Then the real cutting should start.  No more free cell phones.  All foreign aid stopped.  No more military aid to anyone without an act of Congress.  All illegal aliens booted out of the country--no exceptions.  All immigration curtailed.  Absolutely no more slush fund money to private enterprise (Solendra etc.).  No more tax money to the arts and public broadcasting.  No more subsidies to ethanol production.  Pull our military out of Europe and South Korea.  There's plenty more, but this is a start.

[jimster]

There is no work in other places.  Some of you are out of touch.  Sitting in your easy chair drinking coffee listening to Fox News is a long ways from working a daily job.  The government will not suffer but working people will. Fewer working people means higher taxes.

I'm in touch and going to work every day. Bottom line is people in government will have to be laid off sooner or later because they grew 20 percent while the private sector that feeds them shrunk. Yes, for anyone laid off on a government job it would hurt, welcome to the real world finally I guess. If it that happens...but 40 billion won't do it I assure you.
Now consider that Obama said in his last state of the union speech that he cut 2.5 trillion form the debt...I would think the entire country would have bang flopped right there...but no...40 billion was what did it eh?  Laughable. All of the numbers are made up..this little bit of slowing down the spending will affect nobody unless they WANT it to...which they do to prove a point...and government still has not cut back one penny.
When they finally do cut back, yes there will be real layoffs in government jobs, not the ones they make up...and yes those people will be in the same place everyone in the private sector was, so what? It has to happen at some point, and government jobs are NOT the same as the private sector jobs, if we don't have enough private sector to pay for those jobs, they simply can't exist, without running huge deficits. Which we are now. I just realize you won't fix anything without pain, if you do it without pain, you won't be fixing a thing, it's pretty simple really...math rules.  Now this sequester thing has not hut anyone, unless they want it to...it's up to them...cause it is NOT a cut of any kind. What has hurt me, is what has happened the last several years, I won't retire now, everything cost more money because they print it by the billions each month, they won't use our energy sources, they won't cut my taxes at state or fed levels, they RAISED them, and my health care went up, and there are too many to list...but the sequester won't hurt anyone...less they want it to, because it does not add up to any money at all and they still spend a trillion they don't need to in other places. So don't let them sucker you on this little 40 billion they won't spend this next year, after all...our president just cut 2.5 trillion according to his last big speech....right?     OK..he lied...we all know he cut nothing, but they throw around numbers like we are all stupid.
Nobody will be hurt by this little bitty sequester unless they manufacture the hurt on purpose. It is nothing but lies.
 

[Swampman]

From your post I'd say you are completely out of touch.  Most private sector jobs are government jobs indirectly.  They will be lost too.

[Empty Quiver]

From your post I'd say you are completely out of touch.  Most private sector jobs are government jobs indirectly.  They will be lost too.

Swampy, are you trying to say this sequester is gonna un-employ most government workers?


 So far it seems only to effect those running tours, national parks types and others who are in front of the American public on a daily basis. If you aren't effecting the public on a daily basis your job is secure brother, relax.


I will not be concerned when the congressional pages are laid off, when Pelosi's security detail is reduced, when the National Endowment for the Arts is eliminated. If I see Big Bird and Kermit panhandling, when Ken Burns is making Buick commercials I'll get concerned. EPA, Education, and Energy departments gone, Department of Agriculture gutted, along with BATF&E.


Swampy your fight should be against those wasting tax dollars on un-needed projects not on spending cuts. You will keep your job (assuming yours is not one of those frivolous projects) and your tax liability would go down as well. 

[Swampman]

In the long haul it will un-employ a ton of non-government employees too.  With all those jobs lost the government will have to raise taxes to cover the loss.  It will be painless for those who don't work.  That's about 80% of Americans.

[powderman]

MAGOOCH. Good post Sir, but I do enjoy a lot of history on our PBS stations here. POWDERMAN. 

[Gary G]

The economics of this sequester:
1.ILANA MERCER: A microscopic decrease in the increase in government spending has sent our overlords in DC into apoplexy. A cut in oink-sector spending, they’re claiming, will destroy the chances of an economic recovery. It is the exact opposite. You point this out in the chapter on "The Myth of Government Job Creation": "Government spending increases unemployment because it crowds out so much private sector job creation" (p. 202). Explain with reference to the zero-sum nature of government spending – the cost of a government job, and Bastiat’s "What-Is-Seen-and-What-Is-Not-Seen" principle.
THOMAS DILORENZO: Every dollar that the government spends is a dollar that is not spent (or saved) by individuals, families, businesses, and entrepreneurs. Therefore, whenever government grows, private enterprise – the sole source of real job creation – shrinks and unemployment there rises. Each government job destroys several genuine, private sector jobs because of all the bureaucracy and red tape. For example, government may spend $200,000 to give one person a $30,000/year job. And government "jobs" are usually involved in doing something that no one but a few politicians ever voiced a preference for. Private sector jobs, by contrast, cannot survive unless they are part of an enterprise that succeeds in satisfying genuine consumer wants. By contrast, Keynesians like Paul Krugman would have us believe that prosperity is created whenever government takes money out of our bank accounts (with the threat of forcing us to live in a cage for years if we do not pay) and letting government bureaucrats squander the money instead. Part of the Keynesian mantra is that such spending could and should be on "anything" – it doesn’t matter, as long as it is government that is doing the spending. The biggest year of private sector economic growth in American economic history was 1946 when the nation was in the middle of a two-thirds reduction in federal government spending as the military was demobilized from World War II. This proves that the Keyensians were always dead wrong, but of course they and their political patrons ignore this reality.
2. MERCER: You quip: "In Washingtonese, if one proposes a $100 billion spending increase, and actual spending increases by 'only' $90 billion, they call it a $10 billion budget cut." We're in the grip of exactly this kind of a paradox. How is the "Washington Monument Syndrome" playing out in its "sequesteria" version?
DILORENZO: The "Washington Monument Syndrome" is an old bureaucratic trick that is so named because the head of the National Park Service closed down the Washington Monument – the most popular tourist attraction in Washington, D.C. – in the 1960s after Congress refused to fully fund his pie-in-the-sky spending wish list. Tourists from every state, on their annual vacations, called their congressmen to complain, forcing them to give the Park Service bureaucrat all the money he wanted. State and local governments routinely use this sleazy gimmick by immediately threatening to shut down police protection, garbage collection, ambulance service, school buses, and whatever else would impose the maximum pain on the public whenever there is talk of fiscal responsibility. The Obama administration has taken this to buffoonish extremes by threatening to close down airports, etc., were government spending to increase by about one percentage point less than they wish over the next ten years. No one in Washington has proposed cutting a single cent out of the federal budget despite the fact that the surest route to economic recovery would be to chop federal spending in half, and then in half again next year.

http://lewrockwell.com/mercer/mercer18.1.html