Skip to comments.The 'Base Case' Of Full Sequestration Is A Loss Of One Million Jobs
Posted on 02/05/2013 11:58:08 AM PST by blam
The 'Base Case' Of Full Sequestration Is A Loss Of One Million Jobs
The Bipartisan Policy Center an independent group with a long track record of accurate prognostication has confirmed that they expect massive job losses across the board if Congress is unable to avert the sequester.
The prediction isn't without immediate evidence, either. The contraction in GDP last week was largely attributed to decrease in government funding allocated to manufacturing in the defense sector, which has seen a substantial cut as a result of the Budget Control Act of 2011 mandatory spending caps and the gradual end of overseas conflicts.
Here's the key quote from the Bipartisan Policy Center emphasizing how bad sequestration could be in the short term:
CBO estimated a decline of 0.7 percent in 2013 gross domestic product (GDP) growth because of the ripple effect of the sequester cuts on smaller businesses and on government personnel. For an economy that already suffers from chronic unemployment and very slow expansion, the sequester could push the nation into sub-2 percent GDP growth for 2013 and perhaps 2014. [...]
Our estimate of approximately one million lost jobs due to sequester remains our base case if a full sequester occurs as scheduled on March 1.
As it stands, the ball is in Congress' court when it comes to averting the across the board cuts.
The President spoke today about the need to avert sequestration, and Senator Patty Murray, the chair of the Budget Committee has explained how deeply the cuts could shake an already fragile recovery.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Temporarily not paying the Federal Teat Sucking Class is nothing but good in my book.
Let it rain.
There are now 8,500,000 less people working than when Obama was anointed. So what’s 1 million more?
The sequester is needed. The clueless congress critters have no guts to do what is right and bring the spending down. Sequester will make a start in that direction.
Burn, baby, burn.
Below we've included the average base salary and projected growth percentage for each job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Average base salary: $169,479
Projected to grow 15 percent by 2020 (about as fast as average).
Average base salary: $152,768
Projected to grow 24 percent by 2020 (faster than average).
Average base salary: $126,134
Projected to grow 21 percent by 2020 (faster than average)
4. Sales Director
Average base salary: $119,758
Projected to grow 12 percent by 2020 (about as fast as average).
5. Engineering Manager
Average base salary: $117,552
Projected to grow 9 percent by 2020 (slower than average)
Average base salary: $107,490
Projected to grow 25 percent by 2020 (faster than average).
7. Tax Manager
Average base salary: $104,093
Projected to grow 7 percent by 2020 (slower than average).
8. Product Marketing Manager
Average base salary: $103,633
Projected to grow 7 percent by 2020 (slower than average)
9. IT Manager
Average base salary: $101,244
Projected to grow 18 percent by 2020 (about as fast as average)
10. Lead Software Engineer
Average base salary: $100,585
Projected to grow 9 percent by 2020 (slower than average).
Is it 1,000,000 jobs, or 1,000,000 “jobs”
They do not address the economic benefit of removing the burden of 1,000,000 overhead jobs from the private sector economy, nor do they address the benefit of putting some number of those 1,000,000 to work in the private sector.
Long-term the benefit to the economy will be resoundingly, overwhelmingly, and completely positive, if they actually let it happen, which they won’t.
Boehner will capitulate to raising taxes, revenues, fees, and everything else so that the status quo keeps on rocking (for a little while longer), because that’s what Obama wants.
Yup, that's a great strategy.
Setting aside what the cuts do to our nation's military and how it will definitely undermine our men and women in uniform who have sacrificed more for this nation than any other aspect of the US population, your strategy is economic and political poison:
Maybe the Republicans should adopt it and lose the House in 2014 and the next Presidentitial electon this time by 400 electoral votes. I mean, why not?
The cuts are happening now. I'm losing 3 critical members on the software team. We are not fully cross trained to cover the staff that are leaving and even so, we will be woefully understaffed. I routinely work 55 to 60 hours for 40 hours pay to keep a very aggressive schedule up to date. The people that are going will go to other jobs. Even if the customer manages to get funds back, we will have to go through a year getting the new hires cleared, then additional time to train and spin up on the tasking.
Jobs?????!!! “Transformed” America don’t need no steeenkin’ jobs! Why...we have 99 weeks of unemployment, easy disability and free nobamaphones. What’s not to like? Happy days are here again! Hang out...write poietry...watch tv...Get with it, Citizens...this is the 21st century under nobama, the Great Leader.
The libs/Dems only looked at how they could decimate the military and began salivating over it. They forgot/don’t care about how many will lose jobs over this (as long as it isn’t “their” jobs).
1/3 of the military budget is paid by debt now.
About half of that is foreign money (and 1/4 ‘created’ by the fed).
That’s bad for the military too.
It would have been wiser take more cuts in domestic programs but with the idiots we have for voters we’ll be doing good if even more cuts aren’t made in the military.
Rep Buck McKeon (R-CA), who chairs he House Armed Services Committee, said this today:
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., and Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., issued a joint statement warning that further defense cuts would equate to using U.S. troops "as a piggy bank to keep unsustainable [domestic] spending programs on life support." "We must be clear," McKeon and Inhofe said. "This approach is neither responsible nor balanced."
He's right. I have spoken to my own Congressman over the phone about Buck McKeon (whom he knows very well and works with). McKeon is a good man.
Why can't the rest of the Republican leadership state what McKeon is stating? They did during the campaign we just had.
Now, all of sudden, it's "we don't care?"
I don't know - my guess is they are so discouraged by their lack of progress in reforming entitlements that they have adopted the "Destroy the Village in Order to Save It" strategy. That is a recipe for military, economic, and political disaster.
We've known for some time now that these things are coming and even more severe things are on the horizon.
It may all end in a economic/financial collapse anyway.
They’re not just emptying a piggy bank when they cut the military.
They’re killing the goose that gives them several other benefits too.
Two of those benefits:
The status of the dollar as a ‘world currency’, and a dirty secret is that one reason our debt sells at such a low yield is our military strength- “safety”.
At some point cutting the military budget will raise borrowing costs more than is ‘saved’.
But idiots with a media determined to keep them watching advertising won’t let them know until it’s too late.
Excellent points. You are a very wise person.
It may be blam. It may be.
A man I know who was involved in banking told me 3 years ago: "Never underestimate the ability of the Powers That Be to sustain their scam for much longer than you thought possible."
I don't know what the actual end may be. I do agree with you that we are on a very unsustainable path.
God is sovereign.
I've arrived at that conclusion too.