Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
So yeah, nothing is going to happen obviously until after November, but if they don't do a deal before December we are basically royally fucked right?

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
Electromatic wrote:
So yeah, nothing is going to happen obviously until after November, but if they don't do a deal before December we are basically royally fucked right?


I suspect some kind budgetary stopgap measure will get passed to delay/stop it. The tea party republicans won't support it, but Boehner will want it, as will all democrats and the handful of semi reasonable republicans left. It'll be safer to vote for it after the election.

But i don't know. This is unusual (possibly unprecedented) and I don't know that much about whether there are other legal controls built into this to prevent the usual punting.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
stip wrote:
Electromatic wrote:
So yeah, nothing is going to happen obviously until after November, but if they don't do a deal before December we are basically royally fucked right?


I suspect some kind budgetary stopgap measure will get passed to delay/stop it. The tea party republicans won't support it, but Boehner will want it, as will all democrats and the handful of semi reasonable republicans left. It'll be safer to vote for it after the election.

But i don't know. This is unusual (possibly unprecedented) and I don't know that much about whether there are other legal controls built into this to prevent the usual punting.



That's what I've been thinking would happen all along, but I'm getting a little more worried about it. There is precious little wiggle room between the election and possible sequestration. What if it's contested? What if it's close? It's all well and good to bicker so much about the budget they keep kicking the can along, but we're getting really close to the cliff here.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
the government released its detailed report on how Sequestration would impact everything

and here it is

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Maleficent
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:17 pm
Posts: 13551
Location: is a jerk in wyoming
Gender: Female
stip wrote:
the government released its detailed report on how Sequestration would impact everything

url=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20120915-sequester/STAReport_sequester.pdf]and here it is[/url]


don't mods have to complete a 'using board functionality' training class anymore?

_________________
lennytheweedwhacker wrote:
That's it. I'm going to Wyoming.
Alex wrote:
you are the human wyoming


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
malice wrote:
stip wrote:
the government released its detailed report on how Sequestration would impact everything

url=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20120915-sequester/STAReport_sequester.pdf]and here it is[/url]


don't mods have to complete a 'using board functionality' training class anymore?


they do now, probably because of me.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 12:31 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
Quote:
The National Institutes of Health, which provides medical research grants, would lose $2.5 billion. The Federal Bureau of Investigation would take a $742 million hit. Embassy security would be reduced by $129 million. More than $1.4 billion would come out of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s budget.


Eh. We don't need any of that anyway.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:00 am 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
what are you hoping is going to happen here, BI? I don't mean that as a hostile question if it sounds like that. I know you're really bitter about cuts. Did you have previously strong positions on budget deficits, want to see taxes go up, etc?

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:12 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am
Posts: 7189
Location: CA
broken iris wrote:
Quote:
The National Institutes of Health, which provides medical research grants, would lose $2.5 billion. The Federal Bureau of Investigation would take a $742 million hit. Embassy security would be reduced by $129 million. More than $1.4 billion would come out of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s budget.


Eh. We don't need any of that anyway.


How much would we save if we eliminated the ATF and DEA and stopped issuing Social Security officers sidearms?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
stip wrote:
what are you hoping is going to happen here, BI? I don't mean that as a hostile question if it sounds like that. I know you're really bitter about cuts. Did you have previously strong positions on budget deficits, want to see taxes go up, etc?


Well, it's not the cuts, but the manner in which this is going down that frustrates me. I think we do need significant federal cuts, primarily in defense, as well as tax and entitlement reform, but I just see this as the epitome of partisan politicians putting themselves before the good of the country. It almost appears as if they are using the infighting as an excuse to let this happen and thus not be forced to accept responsibility for the cuts. The old "I would have solved this already except the other side got in the way" mantra we have been hearing for decades which replaces the need for our leaders to actually convince us that we cannot continue to spend like we have over the last 40 years if we want to remain an economic powerhouse in the future.

Even late, the Obama Admin's report is a good start since it details which accounts it deems to be at risk, which allows for resource planning to begin. It doesn't directly address that we are spending billions on questionable projects like the Littoral Combat Ship or the JSF because all that is up to the DOD, but now the domestic agencies can align priorities and their employees can decide if they want to risk cuts or shift to an unaffected area.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
stip wrote:
what are you hoping is going to happen here, BI? I don't mean that as a hostile question if it sounds like that. I know you're really bitter about cuts. Did you have previously strong positions on budget deficits, want to see taxes go up, etc?


Well, it's not the cuts, but the manner in which this is going down that frustrates me. I think we do need significant federal cuts, primarily in defense, as well as tax and entitlement reform, but I just see this as the epitome of partisan politicians putting themselves before the good of the country. It almost appears as if they are using the infighting as an excuse to let this happen and thus not be forced to accept responsibility for the cuts. The old "I would have solved this already except the other side got in the way" mantra we have been hearing for decades which replaces the need for our leaders to actually convince us that we cannot continue to spend like we have over the last 40 years if we want to remain an economic powerhouse in the future.

Even late, the Obama Admin's report is a good start since it details which accounts it deems to be at risk, which allows for resource planning to begin. It doesn't directly address that we are spending billions on questionable projects like the Littoral Combat Ship or the JSF because all that is up to the DOD, but now the domestic agencies can align priorities and their employees can decide if they want to risk cuts or shift to an unaffected area.



Not that I'm defending this, but keep in mind that politicians put partisanship ahead of the good of the country if they think that's what their voters want. Given the context of the last election republicans probably couldn't safely compromise on this, given their electorate.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 11:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
stip wrote:

Not that I'm defending this, but keep in mind that politicians put partisanship ahead of the good of the country if they think that's what their voters want.


That's sad view of the electorate and I believed (perhaps naively) that part of the purpose of using representative democracy was so that our leaders rise above the trends and tribal identity satisfaction that drives us to be "red" or "blue" and do what's in the nation's best interest. An August 31st Harris Poll showed 80% of voters want this fixed now. This means someone has to give if they care about the voters desires or the stability of the economy.

stip wrote:
Given the context of the last election republicans probably couldn't safely compromise on this, given their electorate.


I believe Eric Cantor said just that. There is nothing he could think of that they would compromise on to avoid this, which quite literally means that they do not want to avoid this or they would compromise.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:00 am 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
stip wrote:

Not that I'm defending this, but keep in mind that politicians put partisanship ahead of the good of the country if they think that's what their voters want.


That's sad view of the electorate and I believed (perhaps naively) that part of the purpose of using representative democracy was so that our leaders rise above the trends and tribal identity satisfaction that drives us to be "red" or "blue" and do what's in the nation's best interest. An August 31st Harris Poll showed 80% of voters want this fixed now. This means someone has to give if they care about the voters desires or the stability of the economy.

stip wrote:
Given the context of the last election republicans probably couldn't safely compromise on this, given their electorate.


I believe Eric Cantor said just that. There is nothing he could think of that they would compromise on to avoid this, which quite literally means that they do not want to avoid this or they would compromise.



they don't want to compromise, and this is what happens when an ideologically destructive group takes control of one of our political parties. And that IS the voters fault. We authored this in 2010.

If they're punished in 2012 for it we might have enough chastened people after the election to do something.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:05 am 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
Yeah, we'll see who's ideologically destructive in 10-15 years...

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 1:06 am 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
I'm not talking about what may or may not be bad policy, LW. I mean a fundamental refusal to engage in the basic processes that make democratic politics possible.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
stip wrote:
I'm not talking about what may or may not be bad policy, LW. I mean a fundamental refusal to engage in the basic processes that make democratic politics possible.



kind of par for the course in the last 12 years depending on who is the president and who holds congress.

The government has behaved like a bunch of adolesents because we have voters that behave like a bunch of adolesents.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Red Mosquito, my libido
 Profile

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:02 am
Posts: 91597
Location: Sector 7-G
stip wrote:
malice wrote:
stip wrote:
the government released its detailed report on how Sequestration would impact everything

url=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20120915-sequester/STAReport_sequester.pdf]and here it is[/url]


don't mods have to complete a 'using board functionality' training class anymore?


they do now, probably because of me.

How does B still have his job?

_________________
It takes a big man to make a threat on the internet.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Global Moderator
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am
Posts: 44183
Location: New York
Gender: Male
Electromatic wrote:
stip wrote:
I'm not talking about what may or may not be bad policy, LW. I mean a fundamental refusal to engage in the basic processes that make democratic politics possible.



kind of par for the course in the last 12 years depending on who is the president and who holds congress.



No, it's not, and assuming false equivalency is dangerous (everyone does it). That's not to say that there isn't sniping and disagreement and heated politics, etc. But what we've seen the last 4 years is unprecedented, or at least unprecedented for 100+ years.

_________________
"Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR

The perfect gift for certain occasions


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Red Mosquito, my libido
 Profile

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:02 am
Posts: 91597
Location: Sector 7-G
stip wrote:
Electromatic wrote:
stip wrote:
I'm not talking about what may or may not be bad policy, LW. I mean a fundamental refusal to engage in the basic processes that make democratic politics possible.



kind of par for the course in the last 12 years depending on who is the president and who holds congress.



No, it's not, and assuming false equivalency is dangerous (everyone does it). That's not to say that there isn't sniping and disagreement and heated politics, etc. But what we've seen the last 4 years is unprecedented, or at least unprecedented for 100+ years.

I read that book you recommended on my flight home yesterday. It was infuriating.

_________________
It takes a big man to make a threat on the internet.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Sequestration
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
stip wrote:
Electromatic wrote:
stip wrote:
I'm not talking about what may or may not be bad policy, LW. I mean a fundamental refusal to engage in the basic processes that make democratic politics possible.



kind of par for the course in the last 12 years depending on who is the president and who holds congress.



No, it's not, and assuming false equivalency is dangerous (everyone does it). That's not to say that there isn't sniping and disagreement and heated politics, etc. But what we've seen the last 4 years is unprecedented, or at least unprecedented for 100+ years.



Oh really? So the Nancy Pelosi led group wasn't just as obstructionist when Bush was in office as this group? I seem to remember plenty of douchebaggery back between 2004 and 2008.

Yes the Tea Partiers are infuriating, but this is how we have operated for 12 years now. When there is parity there is gridlock. It wasn't always that way but it has been that way for a while now.

The party in power brings bills to the floor, the minority party if strong enough does everything they can to block them.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:26 am