What does it mean? Bellowing aside, budget sequester could cost jobs, dent economic recovery

  • Article by: ANDREW TAYLOR , Associated Press
  • Updated: February 21, 2013 - 3:38 PM
  • 15
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
Packman_1Feb. 21, 13 5:58 PM

Bt all means let's layoff more air traffic controllers. In tea party world, they are an un-necessary expense. People should pull themselves up by their bootstaps and guide that plane themselves. Either that or get in the covered wagon and travel. As long as it's not on a public road.

4
3
dibblegonFeb. 21, 13 6:23 PM

Cut cut cut cut cut! The left will gnash their teeth at reducing the rate of increase of spending let alone actually spending cuts. They will whine and complain about any program getting $1 less. Let the Obama Sequestration begin!!!!!

3
2
drfranktFeb. 21, 13 6:49 PM

For all you libs out there that advocate hitting the evil "rich" because they can handle the higher taxes easier because of the money they have...consider this: $85 billion dollars (the cuts sequestration orders)is 2.3% of the $3.6 TRILLION dollar budget. If the federal government cannot absorb a 2.3% cut to their $3.6 TRILLION budget, and the government has more money than ALL OF THE EVIL RICH, why would you expect anyone with less money than the government to absorb a cut in their income? If this country cannot make it on a 2.3% cut, then, even a community organizer or a liberal should be able to figure out we are giving away TOO DAMN MUCH of the taxpaying public's money!

3
2
avejoeconFeb. 21, 13 7:24 PM

Interesting how the first thing that president cuts is the essential employees. there are THOUSANDS of departments in the federal gov't and Obama's priority are the essential employees. I guess making a political statement is more important than the country's welfare!

5
2
wowjustwowFeb. 21, 13 7:32 PM

You sure would hate to dent this media driven "economic recovery" now wouldn't you? We could comment on the unemployment figures and the economic concerns but I doubt most of your customers will do an advanced search to find those articles. Keep up the Obama apology tour, media. We're doing just swell!!!!

5
2
jpcooperFeb. 21, 13 9:47 PM

I don't have the exact figures because we do not have a Federal Budget but from what I can ascertain..... 2012 Spending $3.6T.... 2013 Estimated spend without "Sequester" $3.74T 2013 Spend with "sequester" $3.655T

In a nut shell if "sequester" happens we will spend approx $50 Billion more in 2013 than we did in 2012! How come 2012 did not have doomsday senerios? layoffs?, job loss? recession? ... A $50B increase in Spending is not a cut!

3
2
jpcooperFeb. 21, 1310:00 PM

" the White House came up with the sequester idea as a way to guarantee large enough deficit cuts to offset enough new borrowing to make sure Washington didn't have to revisit the debt limit until after the 2012 elections."......... " House Republicans twice last year passed legislation to replace the cuts with larger savings drawn from programs like food stamps and federal employee pensions. Democrats controlling the Senate didn't offer an alternative and instead put their faith in postelection negotiations to avert the "fiscal cliff," which resulted in Obama claiming victory on his promise to raise taxes on the rich but only a two-month respite from the sequester."

So The White House (Obama) created the sequester, the House of Reps tried twice to avoid the cuts with alternative spending cuts but Harry would not have any of it, instead the Democrats went after tax increases from the rich offered no spending cuts and expected the Republicans to cave to all their demands!

3
3
clnorthFeb. 22, 13 8:31 AM

"The Congressional Budget Office estimates it will cost 750,000 jobs and lower economic growth by 0.6 percent" That is only two months worth of job losses, but you would never know that because this paper buries unemployment numbers when they are not dropping.

1
0
avejoeconFeb. 22, 13 9:03 AM

I find it interesting that in order to cut 2.3 % off the budget, they are requesting that the essential employees get a 20% cut in pay. No talk of getting rid of the BLOATED administrative level, cutting the waste, cutting per diem for congress. Cutting the Travelling budget of the president. Nope. It's always the threat of Cutting those that are most needed. Anyone else aware that there are over TWO THOUSAND separate welfare type programs, each with it's own administrative costs. Or nearly 100 separate "Jobs training" programs. Or how about the fact that over 50% of the people on food stamps have been collecting for over 10 years!

2
2
benturnerFeb. 22, 1310:16 AM

re: avejoeconFeb. 22, 13 9:03 AM I find it interesting that in order to cut 2.3 % off the budget, they are requesting that the essential employees get a 20% cut in pay. No talk of getting rid of the BLOATED administrative level, cutting the waste, cutting per diem for congress. Cutting the Travelling budget of the president.... joe, exactly what is the "travel budget" of the president?

1
2

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT