Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 98

Thread: Sequestration will actually happen

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death View Post
    the real sacred cows need to be pared down (medicare and Soc Security) aren't affected.
    That won't/can't/shouldn't happen without causing major upheaval in the lives of older people (who can't just go out and get another job). And with the population growing older those programs are bound to grow over the coming decade.

    I know we will see an increase in the age-old 'welfare queen' rhetoric, when the truth is welfare programs (WIC, housing subsidies, CHIP, etc) is only a relatively small portion of the whole welfare pie. Medicare, veterans benefits (medical, retirement, etc), and retirement pensions and benefits make up a larger portion. Those cannot be touched because they are contractually obligated, and the government MUST honor its contracts or have its credit rating downgraded. And a downgraded credit rating will be VERY BAD for the USA (imagine how hard it would be to balance the budget if our debt payments tripled overnight, a la Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc).

  2. #32
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by GarthUte View Post
    I want it to happen as well. Spending is out of control and this looks like the only way to start to get it under control.
    If anything, it may help people realize that cuts won't end the world. Right now there is a lot of hand wringing on what the impact will be, and I predict it will be less noticeable on the macro view than people expect. Obviously, that doesn't do anything to soothe the wounds of those who it actually impacts.

    Hopefully what happens is the way is paved for people actually making smart, surgical cuts once they realize that they can cut without the world ending. Or it may just pave the way to other "mutually assured political destruction" type scenarios since that seems to be the only way we can get congress to agree on anything.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    You are fooling yourself if you don't think defense is a sacred cow.
    Totally. The DOD is already operating on a 6% lower budget than 2012 (which does NOT count the cost of overseas deployments). Sequestration will force an extra 14% cut off the 2012 budget.

    We can no longer afford to be the world cop and should pare back our foreign bases, etc. But even recent history has shown that world-wide stability has a price. Personally I think we have done some good things over the last half century with our presence in Europe and Japan, but have bungled Central America and the Middle East.

    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post


    Hopefully what happens is the way is paved for people actually making smart, surgical cuts once they realize that they can cut without the world ending.
    Unfortunately, Sequestration is brain surgery accomplished with a 10# maul. But at least both parties will be forced to kill their own Santa Claus, for the good of the country.

  4. #34
    Sadly it is in Obama and the democrats best political interest to make sure this is painful or they will look like fools for saying armageddon is coming. Perhaps all politicians and many others do believe in the "ends justify the means", but I am almost positive Obama believes in it.

    Of course his buddies in the press will make sure they highlight every person who is put out over this.

    I would like to see some taxes increased though. Carried interest is a joke. Sadly the dems will probably want to protect this as much as the republicans since they benefit greatly from hedge fund contributions. Secondly I would like to see the tax break given to Hollywood in the last tax increase taken back. How do you increase taxes but give Hollywood a tax credit at the same time. Maybe that is how Michelle got to present best picture.

  5. #35
    Five-O Diehard Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,894
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    How do you increase taxes but give Hollywood a tax credit at the same time. Maybe that is how Michelle got to present best picture.
    Please. It's the government. I pay more in taxes as a single male with no children than my coworkers with two kids.

    I should not be punished for choosing to not marry or have kids, but I am.

    Our tax laws make absolutely no sense and never have.

  6. #36
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Please. It's the government. I pay more in taxes as a single male with no children than my coworkers with two kids.

    I should not be punished for choosing to not marry or have kids, but I am.

    Our tax laws make absolutely no sense and never have.
    That's just the government's way of encouraging you to have many Mini Diehards. You are wise to see through their guise. It is not a financial win.

  7. #37
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    Sadly it is in Obama and the democrats best political interest to make sure this is painful or they will look like fools for saying armageddon is coming. Perhaps all politicians and many others do believe in the "ends justify the means", but I am almost positive Obama believes in it.

    Of course his buddies in the press will make sure they highlight every person who is put out over this.

    I would like to see some taxes increased though. Carried interest is a joke. Sadly the dems will probably want to protect this as much as the republicans since they benefit greatly from hedge fund contributions. Secondly I would like to see the tax break given to Hollywood in the last tax increase taken back. How do you increase taxes but give Hollywood a tax credit at the same time. Maybe that is how Michelle got to present best picture.
    "Hollywood's reward to the Obamas."

    That's what I told my wife when I saw she gave that out.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Please. It's the government. I pay more in taxes as a single male with no children than my coworkers with two kids.

    I should not be punished for choosing to not marry or have kids, but I am.

    Our tax laws make absolutely no sense and never have.
    You think that is a rip, how about property taxes. I think in Utah it all goes to education. I might be wrong, but I think the churches in Utah encourage, stongly encourage having a lot kids. Yet those same churches pay nothing in property taxes.

    I am all for someone having as many kids as they want, but why should other people subsidize them doing so?

  9. #39
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    You think that is a rip, how about property taxes. I think in Utah it all goes to education. I might be wrong, but I think the churches in Utah encourage, stongly encourage having a lot kids. Yet those same churches pay nothing in property taxes.

    I am all for someone having as many kids as they want, but why should other people subsidize them doing so?
    I'm not sure I am following the complaint here.

    Is it that the church encourages large families but doesn't pay any property taxes to support the education said families, or the fact that property taxes go to education in general?

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    "Hollywood's reward to the Obamas."

    That's what I told my wife when I saw she gave that out.
    I heard somewhere that she invited herself to make the presentation for whatever category it was. That seems more plausible to me than some sort of political payback.
    "Ninety feet between home plate and first base may be the closest man has ever come to perfection." - Red Smith

  11. #41
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by GarthUte View Post
    I heard somewhere that she invited herself to make the presentation for whatever category it was. That seems more plausible to me than some sort of political payback.
    [spoiler] [/spoiler]

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    I'm not sure I am following the complaint here.

    Is it that the church encourages large families but doesn't pay any property taxes to support the education said families, or the fact that property taxes go to education in general?
    I probably shouldn't have said it is a rip off. I am just tired of hearing people howl and moan about class sizes per student. There is a reason for this. Large families and a large part of the community using all kinds of government benefits pay no taxes. People ought to accept the positives of living in this culture and not whine about others needing to pay more taxes to subsidize the consequences of the culture.

  13. #43
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    I probably shouldn't have said it is a rip off. I am just tired of hearing people howl and moan about class sizes per student. There is a reason for this. Large families and a large part of the community using all kinds of government benefits pay no taxes. People ought to accept the positives of living in this culture and not whine about others needing to pay more taxes to subsidize the consequences of the culture.
    Agreed!

  14. #44
    Five-O Diehard Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,894
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    I probably shouldn't have said it is a rip off. I am just tired of hearing people howl and moan about class sizes per student. There is a reason for this. Large families and a large part of the community using all kinds of government benefits pay no taxes. People ought to accept the positives of living in this culture and not whine about others needing to pay more taxes to subsidize the consequences of the culture.
    I'm still not sure what your position is. Are you saying those who don't have kids, or those who have only one kid should be just be ok paying more?

  15. #45
    I guess my position is those who have a lot of kids shouldn't be whining about public education needing more money. Any additional money for education should be raised through a per kid tax.

  16. #46
    Five-O Diehard Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,894
    Quote Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
    I guess my position is those who have a lot of kids shouldn't be whining about public education needing more money. Any additional money for education should be raised through a per kid tax.
    Ok. I agree 100% with this.

    I know my coworkers have been shocked at how much more income tax I paid because I'm a single make with no kids.

    When I did my taxes it had a statistical breakdown of my income tax vs others in my tax bracket.

    I made $20,000 less a year than the average filer in my bracket. I paid $400 more than the average filer in my bracket.

  17. #47
    I love how Krauthammer put it....

    "What we’re talking about here is two cents on the dollar. Every dollar the government spends today, 35 cents is borrowed from the Chinese and others. What is going on here is ending up in a position where we borrow not 35, but 33 cents, and that is going to bring Armageddon."

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/2...tration-alive/

  18. #48
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Stansbury Park, Ut
    Posts
    23
    Here's the problem. It's not short term debt, but long term debt that is the issue. That's why we should have neither raised taxes or cut spending in the short term. If both parties would have simply attacked the long term debt and looked at income tax reform all of this drama could have been avoided. But both parties are playing political games and blaming the other party.

    The republicans have passed numerous bills that they know the Senate and President won't agree to, just to say see we are working. The senate and president make no such pretense, they just continue to babble on (or fiddle while Rome burns). It was interesting to hear the local food bank talk about cuts under sequestration and the funding they would lose, because they also said they would lose just as much funding if the president's plan passed and charitable contributions were capped, but notice no one is talking about that little nugget.

  19. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan View Post
    That won't/can't/shouldn't happen without causing major upheaval in the lives of older people (who can't just go out and get another job). And with the population growing older those programs are bound to grow over the coming decade.

    I know we will see an increase in the age-old 'welfare queen' rhetoric, when the truth is welfare programs (WIC, housing subsidies, CHIP, etc) is only a relatively small portion of the whole welfare pie. Medicare, veterans benefits (medical, retirement, etc), and retirement pensions and benefits make up a larger portion. Those cannot be touched because they are contractually obligated, and the government MUST honor its contracts or have its credit rating downgraded. And a downgraded credit rating will be VERY BAD for the USA (imagine how hard it would be to balance the budget if our debt payments tripled overnight, a la Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc).
    are you saying we can't alter medicare or social security without having our downgraded? My thought on reform was a staggered approach of moving ages of retirement back 5 years. Over the next 10 years we make it so social security can't start until 66 (currently its at 62) and we incentivize people to wait till they are 70 or 72 to start taking from the till. I also think we should cap the increase in payments to Soc Sec to 2% a year. For Medicare I would phase people in as well. Let people from 60 - 70 buy High Deductible Health savings (5K deductible with current medicare premiums that reimburses at Medicare rates). After 70 its Medicare as it currently is.

  20. #50
    Not at all. Tweaks to Medicare and Social Security would likely help bring the budget for those entities into balance.

    The contracts that must be fulfilled are pensions, acquisitions, debt payments, certain multi-year service contracts, etc.

  21. #51
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Looks like Bob Woodward is catching some heat from the White House about his report that sequestration was the President's idea:

    Woodward: White House Warned Me "You Will Regret Doing This"

    WOLF BLITZER, CNN: You're used to this kind of stuff, but share with our viewers what's going on between you and the White House.

    BOB WOODWARD: Well, they're not happy at all and some people kind of, you know, said, look, 'we don't see eye to eye on this.' They never really said, though, afterwards, they've said that this is factually wrong, and they -- and it was said to me in an e-mail by a top --

    BLITZER: What was said?

    WOODWARD: It was said very clearly, you will regret doing this.

    BLITZER: Who sent that e-mail to you?

    WOODWARD: Well, I'm not going to say.

    BLITZER: Was it a senior person at the White House?

    WOODWARD: A very senior person. And just as a matter -- I mean, it makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, 'you're going to regret doing something that you believe in, and even though we don't look at it that way, you do look at it that way.' I think if Barack Obama knew that was part of the communication's strategy, let's hope it's not a strategy, that it's a tactic that somebody's employed, and said, 'Look, we don't go around trying to say to reporters, if you, in an honest way, present something we don't like, that, you know, you're going to regret this.' It's Mickey Mouse. (The Situation Room, February 27, 2013)
    Video at the link.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  22. #52
    I thought sequestration didnt have anything to do with Medicare?

    Crain's business daily

    If sequestration kicks in Friday as planned, the 2 percent payment reduction to Medicare providers and insurers will be for services provided on or after April 1, an Health and Human Services spokesman confirmed Wednesday.

    When asked if HHS has already alerted providers and insurers about the date of the payment cuts, the spokesman replied in an e-mail, “If sequestration occurs, official notifications will be made.”

    The lack of any notice from HHS left provider groups to wonder when their members will see those reductions. An official for the American Health Care Association — which represents skilled-nursing facilities and assisted-living providers—said there has been confusion among the organization's staff and lawyers about when those cuts would take place, while the American Hospital Association, Federation of American Hospitals and National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems all anticipated the cuts would begin in April.

    “That was an extrapolation from the January extension,” said Shawn Gremminger, an NAPH lobbyist, about the two-month delay to the start of the sequester approved in a Jan. 2 budget deal.

    Legislation that created the sequester specified that it cut Medicare reimbursements for services provided the month after the sequester's start, which was originally scheduled for Jan. 2. Providers are expected to see the cuts show up in their Medicare reimbursements sometime around mid-April—depending on the time the CMS typically takes to process their payments.

  23. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by SavaUte View Post
    I love hearing all these people who are not directly affected saying bring it on. Maybe we should just up taxes on everyone by 20%, and cancel all planned and approved vacation time - you still think its a good idea? Do you work for a company that has a goverment contract? Get ready for things to change. We'll start seeing huge flight delays... Yeah, this sounds great

    The government is too big, but the way to fix it is not to screw people, but reduce by attrition (when someone retires or quits their position is not re-filled). This will take 15 years or so, but it gets the job done without directly punishing someone simply because they decided to take a job for the government (generally lower paying than the private sector, but supposed to have much higher stability)
    I agree that attrition is the best way to contract, though our real problem is non-discretionary SS and Medicare spending and MRD has good ideas on addressing those issues. I would like to address your premise that those of us who say bring it on are not affected. I've been very much affected. Most of my income comes from cattle that I have held for more than one year, and is therefore capital gain income. Thanks to the fiscal cliff negotiations and Obamacare, my after-tax income is 10% lower than it would have been under previous tax rates. Further, the sequestration scare has knocked up to 13% off of the value of the cattle I intended to sell. Total it all up, and my after tax income is 18% lower than it would have been without all of this nonsense. I have skin in this game.

    Quote Originally Posted by utebehindenemylines View Post
    ^^^This. It's easy to think that if you are not directly involved you won't be affected, but most will be affected indirectly. Now think of the impact this will have on the local economies surrounding military bases. 20% less income for me means I'll be trimming the fat anywhere I can (eating out, movies, electronics, vehicles). How's that housing market going to look when many default on house payments and are forced into forclosure? I'm already 30k underwater on a "slam dunk" purchase I made in 09 when the housing market had "hit bottom". 5 years into a recession that won't be ending any time soon.
    I understand you are directly affected and it sucks, as do all layoffs/reductions. But we can't keep spending beyond our means, and tax increases won't close the gap. We have to reduce the size and obligations of our government, which means pain for everyone. However, there is no reason that a 3% decrease in the planned budget (we're still spending more than we did last year) should cause furloughs of this magnitude. There is plenty of fat to trim $85 billion without furloughs (maybe we could start with the $2.2 billion we spend in buying cell phones for food stamp recipients,) and it seems to be this administration's strategy to make the cuts as painful as possible to gain public support for tax increases.

  24. #54
    This is what the two sides cannot agree upon:

    574937_10151320853845197_1356460060_n.jpg

  25. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Switzerland View Post
    This is what the two sides cannot agree upon:

    574937_10151320853845197_1356460060_n.jpg
    Wow, spending really skyrocketed during the Bush years. I think Defense is important, I'm just not a fan of all the Offense.

  26. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by DU Ute View Post
    Wow, spending really skyrocketed during the Bush years. I think Defense is important, I'm just not a fan of all the Offense.
    Yep, Bush was no conservative. He only seems fiscally conservative compared to Dear Leader.
    "Ninety feet between home plate and first base may be the closest man has ever come to perfection." - Red Smith

  27. #57
    Boehner, Cantor, the majority whip, McConnell, Pelosi, Reid, Biden and Obama should all resign for this epic fail. I know, it would never happen, but they should pay the price for this, not the ordinary Americans who actually will pay for it.

  28. #58
    The only thing that is humane about how the federal government is going about this is they're doing a furlough rather than dumping mass quantities of people on the streets.

    20% pay cut? A whole lot of people need to be expecting they'll be getting pay cuts in the years upcoming, not just government workers. I'm in healthcare, and I'm personally expecting some kind of pay cut like that, because the average US worker's wages are falling, relative to global competition, in a lot of areas.

    There's a Systems job available for the F-35 Fighter program at Hill AFB, and I just have to shake my head at whoever might have a good job now jumping for that job. F-35 fighter is an awesome piece of hardware, but the American taxpayer just can't afford that machine. As we get more Walmart type jobs, we'll be able to afford the same level of defense spending less & less.

  29. #59
    Senior Member big z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    The only thing that is humane about how the federal government is going about this is they're doing a furlough rather than dumping mass quantities of people on the streets.

    20% pay cut? A whole lot of people need to be expecting they'll be getting pay cuts in the years upcoming, not just government workers. I'm in healthcare, and I'm personally expecting some kind of pay cut like that, because the average US worker's wages are falling, relative to global competition, in a lot of areas.

    There's a Systems job available for the F-35 Fighter program at Hill AFB, and I just have to shake my head at whoever might have a good job now jumping for that job. F-35 fighter is an awesome piece of hardware, but the American taxpayer just can't afford that machine. As we get more Walmart type jobs, we'll be able to afford the same level of defense spending less & less.
    The Lockheed Martin folks are still getting paid, and the F-35 like the Raptor isn't going anywhere. Those jobs are relatively safe for now, but if you're in the private sector looking to get into the civil service right now isn't a good time to do it.
    “The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively”
    ~Bob Marley

  30. #60
    Senior Member big z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by USS Utah View Post
    Boehner, Cantor, the majority whip, McConnell, Pelosi, Reid, Biden and Obama should all resign for this epic fail. I know, it would never happen, but they should pay the price for this, not the ordinary Americans who actually will pay for it.
    I agree with everything in this post!
    “The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively”
    ~Bob Marley

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •