It was not necessary.
Despite the DN's attempt to make this into another partisan controversy -
that there really was no problem, evidently the House did take it seriously, and
passed legislation to address the effects. From the news the rest of the world
seesPer the AP"The Republican-controlled House
approved legislation Wednesday to prevent a government shutdown on March 27 and
blunt the impact of newly imposed spending cuts on the Defense
Department."Good grief folks.... but the blue and red hats away.
The reason the market didn't loose its mind over this - was they knew this
was bad enough that something had to be done. And something was
done. Lets stop pretending this was all much to do about nothing.
The sequester's not great, but it's the best we could hope for in
Obama's Washington.If Republicans have the guts to stick to
their guns on the continuing resolution fight, that, combined with the
sequestration cuts, would cap spending at 2008 levels, force abandonment of the
Obamacare debacle, and allow, at least in the short term, the inevitable growth
that would result to eliminate the deficit.It won't solve the
long-term entitlements issue, but once the economy rebounds, and Obama's
voodoo economics are thoroughly discredited, politicians will be forced to give
in to pressure to save Social Security, recognizing the current scam for the
Ponzi it is, means testing its benefits, and placing it on firm footing for
future recipients by making it the contribution-based system FDR originally sold
Here is a sequester comparison that the average American should be able to
understand.Cutting 85 Billion dollars from yearly U.S. expenditures
is exactly like a person who makes $36,000 per year, cutting their yearly
spending by $85.00.Is there any one of us, making that amount of
money, that couldn't cut their spending by 85 bucks over the course of a
Let's see, first the idea of the sequester originated with President
Obama.Then he got the tax increases he wanted back in December.Now he wants to close tax loopholes so he can raise taxes and make the
tax code "Fairer."And now, once again, he's playing the
"blame game" with the Republicans.Fool me once, shame on
you; fool me twice shame on me.
@Red Corvette -- Obama got SOME of his tax increases, not all. He also agreed
to $1 trillion in spending cuts in 2011 (before the sequester deal). So, I
guess the Republicans got what they wanted too. So now why does Obama have to
give in to the Republicans 100% while they don't have to give at all? Why
do Republicans always want everything of what they want and can NEVER
compromise? Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too.
Wonder,You still don't get it. Most liberals and democrats
don't. So lets try again. You can tax 100% of everything.
You can confiscate all money from everyone and only cover the federal budget for
one year. What about the next year?We don't have a tax
problem. We have a spending problem. Obama would increase federal
revenue by $1.7 Trillion from 2013-2022 (Tax Policy Center). Meanwhile, federal
deficits would total nearly $8.3 Trillion during that same time span (assuming
the increased revenue and budgets remain as they currently are). We currently
have over $16 Trillion in debt. So in 2022 our debt would grow to nearly $25
Trillion. You cannot raise sufficient revenue to reverse.Republicans have it right. Spending must be addressed.Look, if
you are overspending by $5000 per month, would you get a new job that brings in
an additional $100 and believe you are going to be alright? Of course not. You
have to reduce the spending. you have to change your lifestyle. this is what
Republicans are trying to do: achieve meaningful reforms that preserve our
nation. It is going to require a lifestyle change.
Belief is only what you can count on or depend on. So the only thing that I can
belief is things are going to get a lot worse.