Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Debating with the enemy


Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Debating with the enemy


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-01-2013, 12:07 AM   #1
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,876
Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

So where does everyone fall on this, I assume it will be fairly normal lines, but does anyone think that this will actually force uniform across the board cuts, or is it all just normal inside beltway drama?


Competing sequestration bills fail in Senate - The Washington Post
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-01-2013, 05:10 AM   #2
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,237
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
So where does everyone fall on this, I assume it will be fairly normal lines, but does anyone think that this will actually force uniform across the board cuts, or is it all just normal inside beltway drama?


Competing sequestration bills fail in Senate - The Washington Post
OK, my! This is going to hurt many and I blame washington as a whole not one group,to me anyway between the President,the Senate and Congress they all want this so noone takes blame and all can blame each other,I think they want it.It will also be a bigger hit here in the DC area then outside in the rest of the country.
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 10:33 AM   #3
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,237
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Sequestration is very, very bad. I don't know a single person that doesn't believe there can be some significant cuts to the government. That said, a flat 15% cut is a very ineffective way to get those results. Critical programs will be affected the same way as less-critical programs.

Additionally, there will be a massive hit to the US economy because of this, which has already started. Many of the government employees I work with/know have already started the belt tightening, and that will only get worse if it hits. Local businesses will be affected the hardest of all because of this shutdown.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 10:35 AM   #4
Gamebreaker
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 12,573
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

We need to cut a ton in our wasteful, ineffecient government. It needs to get done, but this is probably the wrong way. Your taking piece of meat and cutting it clean without trimming the fat properly. Our idiot president and idiot congress has proven they cant agree on one meaningful economic policy. They should burn the f*cking white house and congress to the ground. both are lying, f*cking worthless bodies of the government.
__________________
Boycott Rolling Stone Magazine
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 10:38 AM   #5
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,237
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chico23231 View Post
We need to cut a ton in our wasteful, ineffecient government. It needs to get done, but this is probably the wrong way. Your taking piece of meat and cutting it clean without trimming the fat properly. Our idiot president and idiot congress has proven they cant agree on one meaningful economic policy. They should burn the f*cking white house and congress to the ground. both are lying, f*cking worthless bodies of the government.
That is the perfect analogy to this issue.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 11:34 AM   #6
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,702
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

If anyone doubted that government has become a travesty of its original purpose, this latest piece of nonsense encapsulates all the faults perfectly.

Chico23231 for President!
RedskinRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 11:37 AM   #7
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

I'm tired of hearing all the bitching from everyone involved. With this cut there is still a 15 BILLION INCREASE in 2013 over 2012. Where Chico23231 is wrong is that this will force them to cut the fat or they can just be lazy and make the ez cuts like in personel. So now defense needs to find the FAT and trim the meat. Social programs need to also be cut back because too many people are sitting on their ass living off all the goverment assistance they can get. So I guess you can see I'm for the cuts. Might not be the best way to get them done but this way they are getting cut. While I hate to see anyone loose their job I feel we could probably cut 5 to 8% of the federal workers and never no the cuts were made.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 11:48 AM   #8
Gamebreaker
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 12,573
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

It was also depressing to see the Democrats using the "political fear tatics" on the public and the media. Thats GOP go to move. We really have no choice in Washington.
__________________
Boycott Rolling Stone Magazine
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 12:42 PM   #9
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chico23231 View Post
It was also depressing to see the Democrats using the "political fear tatics" on the public and the media. Thats GOP go to move. We really have no choice in Washington.
What I don't like is when our stupid ass President announces that we cannot protect the airports and the American people because of the sequestration. WTF, I don't buy that but why the hell would you announce that to the world? Does that not invite trouble.

As for the highlited area the Dems have been doing that for as long as I can remember. When N. Gengrish back in the 80's wanted to do welfare refrom the dem's said we were going to starve children, old people would die, people would become homless, etc... Its not new.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 12:49 PM   #10
Gamebreaker
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 12,573
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

^yeah no one does it better than the republicans. Karl Rove and McCains baby robo call during the primaries in Carolinas and the Obama's a Muslim rhetoric during the campaign are my favorites.
__________________
Boycott Rolling Stone Magazine
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 01:00 PM   #11
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chico23231 View Post
^yeah no one does it better than the republicans. Karl Rove and McCains baby robo call during the primaries in Carolinas and the Obama's a Muslim rhetoric during the campaign are my favorites.

We will have to disagree on that.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 01:48 PM   #12
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,702
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

This should help clarify things in the future:

A bill introduced by Montana state Rep. Steve Lavin would give corporations the right to vote in municipal elections:-

Provision for vote by corporate property owner. If a firm, partnership, company, or corporation owns real property within the municipality, the president, vice president, secretary, or other designee of the entity is eligible to vote in a municipal election.

The bill does contain some limits on these new corporate voting rights. Corporations would not be entitled to vote in “school elections,” and the bill only applies to municipal elections. So state and federal elections would remain beyond the reach of the new corporate voters. In fairness to Lavin’s fellow lawmakers, this bill was tabled shortly after it came before a legislative committee, so it is unlikely to become law.


Once we get the general population out of the equation things will be soooo much easier. /SARC
RedskinRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 02:44 PM   #13
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat View Post
This should help clarify things in the future:

A bill introduced by Montana state Rep. Steve Lavin would give corporations the right to vote in municipal elections:-

Provision for vote by corporate property owner. If a firm, partnership, company, or corporation owns real property within the municipality, the president, vice president, secretary, or other designee of the entity is eligible to vote in a municipal election.

The bill does contain some limits on these new corporate voting rights. Corporations would not be entitled to vote in “school elections,” and the bill only applies to municipal elections. So state and federal elections would remain beyond the reach of the new corporate voters. In fairness to Lavin’s fellow lawmakers, this bill was tabled shortly after it came before a legislative committee, so it is unlikely to become law.

Once we get the general population out of the equation things will be soooo much easier. /SARC
Makes some sense to me. I own a business in one city and have no voting rights and have no voice in the city. I can guarantee I pay more taxes in the city then probably 90% of the residents.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 02:58 PM   #14
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,876
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat View Post
This should help clarify things in the future:

A bill introduced by Montana state Rep. Steve Lavin would give corporations the right to vote in municipal elections:-

Provision for vote by corporate property owner. If a firm, partnership, company, or corporation owns real property within the municipality, the president, vice president, secretary, or other designee of the entity is eligible to vote in a municipal election.

The bill does contain some limits on these new corporate voting rights. Corporations would not be entitled to vote in “school elections,” and the bill only applies to municipal elections. So state and federal elections would remain beyond the reach of the new corporate voters. In fairness to Lavin’s fellow lawmakers, this bill was tabled shortly after it came before a legislative committee, so it is unlikely to become law.


Once we get the general population out of the equation things will be soooo much easier. /SARC
Honestly, if we could only eliminate citizen voting, and move to robotic voters, we would solve the country's problems.
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 03:02 PM   #15
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,876
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

For me, anything that forces spending cuts on the holy grails of the government budget is good. And this bill gives everyone cover so we can trim some and let 2011's congress and president take the blame. We should make automatic 5-10% cuts after each house term (unless we are in a balanced budget or net surplus situation) and then let the new Congress reset priorities if needed.
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.30609 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25