Sequestration 101
Sequestration – Bring on the cuts!
A brief look at national politics for a moment…
Lucky for me – I haven’t really watched TV since late summer 2011. And from what I’ve been reading – all the mainstream media is talking about as of late is the whole big, bad, scary “sequestration” that is injecting fear and worry into all the sheeple that still live & die by the words of the fake, manufactured “news” you see on the boob tube.
Don’t let them scare you with Sequestration chatter!
Perhaps I should remind you of one great alternative news source: The Ulsterman Report.
They ran an article in reference to the March 1st. Sequester deadline that takes the spin out of what the MSM is trying to convince everyone of. Here’s an excerpt:
“Let’s say sequestration happens. People don’t understand that with all those cuts in place, the federal budget would actually be returning to 2007 levels. And in 2007, the United States was already spending way too much money on itself. Democrats said as much back then. Barack Obama called the spending in 2007 “unpatriotic.” Right? So that is the level of spending we would be returning to. The levels of spending going on now during the Obama era are not just unpatriotic. They are insane and threaten every man woman and child in America.
Could there be some short term pain? Sure. The last time we actually saw a widespread reduction in government spending was the defense cuts of the early 1990s. Unemployment rose to just over 7%, though in a couple years went back down to about 4%. GDP exploded to almost 10 trillion by the end of the 1990s. More jobs. More money. More opportunities for all Americans. It isn’t rocket science. Just basic common sense free market capitalism. The kind of free market capitalism the Obama White House has wanted to destroy since day one.
I say let them have it. Sequester away. Cut away. Cut. Cut. Cut.
Let the cuts happen. Then and only then will people start to realize that they don’t need all this government. Remind people that Barack Obama wasted about $100 billion on bogus green energy companies that were just paybacks to his political supporters. Remind people we are spending over a billion dollars per year on the Obama family alone. Or better yet, explain to people how much it is going to cost all of us, every last one of us, if interest rates jump up to even a moderate 5%. Do they realize how many more hundreds of billions of dollars that will cost the country every year? It will easily dwarf the tiny by comparison cuts we are talking about here with sequestration.”
I think the only people that might need to worry are those who lean on government handouts and freebies a bit too much. Don’t let them scare you. They’re doing it on purpose. You know the “psychological trickery” by now, don’t you?
Enjoy!
Hoboken NJ
February 25th, 2013 |
At this point I have little love lost with any politician on either side of the sequestration debate. I especially love those on both sides who are now pointed to the other saying “what ever happens, it’s their fault!” while forgetting to take down the clips from their own sites that proudly claimed credit for pushing the sequester legislation through last year.
But Perry, for the sake of your own rep if nothing else, second source the numbers in any repost on this issue. To have wasted $100B in green energy, the Obama administration would have had to have lost every penny in the $90B in green energy loans made to date (not subsidies, not tax credits, loans that need to be paid back) plus another $10B out of clean air (pun intended). Instead, as of Oct. 2012, the loss rate has been 1.4% (that includes Solyndra, who arguably was killed by Chinese solar firms undercutting the market as much as any mismanagement on their own part). Most equity firms would consider that an enviable success rate.
Small wonder Bijou Properties and so many others are going all in on sustainable energy and green development.
Login or Register to reply
February 25th, 2013 |
All just a distracting political move…
Login or Register to reply
February 25th, 2013 |
Rich – You’re spot on with your first paragraph. Its no longer about trying to work to find a resolution, its about placing blame on the other party.
Oh, bipartisanship where have you gone?
And its not only “government handouts” that will take a hit with this. If this takes effect, it will most certainly weaken our National Defense.
In response to rich k who said:
Login or Register to reply
February 25th, 2013 |
I don’t think the cuts are such a bad thing. Nice chart Hoboken411! It puts things in perspective…
In response to hoboken411 who said:
Login or Register to reply
February 26th, 2013 |
To me, nothing is funnier than a disclaimer of “I don’t watch TV, instead I refer you to this completely biased website for news”. Come on. Any time numbers are accompanied by a bunch of one-sided knocks you have to discount the numbers.
Everyone is suddenly an economist. The example above makes it sound like there’s a correlation between cuts and economic growth. The growth had NOTHING to do with the cuts, but with other market forces.
Login or Register to reply
February 27th, 2013 |
Instead of digging in their heels, the politicians should just sit down together and compromise for the good of the country as a whole, just as its always been done historically. All this 11th hour doomsday deadline maneuvering just makes them all look like the idiots they are, across the board.
Login or Register to reply
February 27th, 2013 |
Missing the forest for the trees
Emitting bills of credit are illegal for the states and federal government (Congress). States are only to coin gold and silver currency. Federal government can only regulate value, and borrow in the short term as long as the revenues can pay the debt. The problem comes when Congress, through an illegal Federal Reserve (not within constitutional authority) action, prints legal tender based on emitting bills of credit ($16+ trillion national debt). The gold (and silver) standard based currency was put in place so that the government could never borrow more than we could pay. The reason Pres. Wilson and the socialists began the move away from gold and silver notes, which future presidents continued, is for the socialist and entitlement programs that began from that. There just wasn’t enough gold and silver to borrow against to pay for all the soon to be enacted socialist programs. Same socialists championed foreign entanglement.
If this government were to govern legally, it would do so based on gold and silver notes, thus the national debt would not exist.
Login or Register to reply