Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans Must Honor the Sequester Deal ^ | 12/30/12 | Rob Binsrick

Posted on 12/30/2012 9:20:11 AM PST by Desperado67

It is looking more and more like Washington politicians are once again going to kick the can down the road to show any level of fiscal responsibility by passing another short-term solution to avert the so-called fiscal cliff. This is the economic disaster which is supposedly going to hit the nation if tax rates are allowed to return to the levels in place during the Clinton era (when the economy was pretty good) and federal spending levels are forced to be cut by approximately 3% per year over the next decade.

That second part of the equation was part of the agreement that the White House and Congress made in 2011 during the debate to raise the debt limit. Republicans wanted reforms to entitlements and cuts in other federal programs. Barack Obama and his fellow democrats wanted...well, to keep spending money at the current levels and even more money to 'invest' in the new federal programs.

Given Obama's position, which is shared by most other democrats, the Republicans should absolutely do nothing to break the sequester deal.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: deficit; demagogicparty; obama; partisanmediashills; republicans; sequester

1 posted on 12/30/2012 9:20:19 AM PST by Desperado67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Desperado67

The sequester deal isn’t actually going to cut spending because of baseline budgeting. It’s just less spending increases.

The only way to actually bring government in line is to stop raising the debt limit!

2 posted on 12/30/2012 10:06:16 AM PST by Dave346
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Desperado67

hilarious headline

WOn’t even pretend the Democrats have any honor at all

3 posted on 12/30/2012 10:11:50 AM PST by GeronL (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dave346

It will increase spending, and it should and must. The debate is over decreasing the rate, as it should and must be.

The country adds population. The country grows GDP. There is inflation. You relentlessly must have more spending each year because of simply that. If the US government spent what it spent in say, 1800, there would be no FAA and plane crashes every day. You would get sick every day from bad food because of no FDA. There would be no FBI and the mafia would rule your life. There would be no Air Force. No aircraft carriers. No missiles. None of those existed or were funded in 1800.

What Sequester does is reduce spending as a % of GDP, and while I think that should be quoted as % of population, it nonetheless is a better measure than raw dollars. When you cut spending from the baseline curve, it is indeed a real and proper cut. It just requires us to work to understand it.

4 posted on 12/30/2012 10:15:02 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Owen
Our government can reduce spending, and it should and it must. Or we go broke. Think Weimar.

Adding working population doesn't necessarily cost much. If the private sector part of the GDP increases, it doesn't cost the government anything. And inflation is caused by the government.

We really do not need to spend 100s of billions on wasteful green energy, nor on medicare for illegal immigrants, nor on any of 10,000 other large and small boondoggles.

Yes, the government needs to spend more on 100,000 miles of highway than it did on 10,000. But that begs the question of how much is currently wasted and can be cut.

In 2009 Obama blew $1Trillion on stimulus. That $1T was supposed to be a one time thing, but has been in the baseline budget figures ever since. Surely we can cut this $1T now.

Every private enterprise has been doing more with less every year for the last 50. Only government gets away with things like spending far more money for far worse results in education.

The debate over reducing the rate of increase is just an exercise in futility. We reduce the spending or we fail, because there's no way the government can tax enough to spend the way they want.

5 posted on 12/30/2012 6:42:56 PM PST by slowhandluke (It's hard to be cynical enough in this age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson