Skip to main content

View Diary: Furlough notices come to the Defense Department (41 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't care. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cindem, Eric K

    Shared sacrifice means that people who never had to experience cuts should experience them. People who work in defense haven't experienced cuts in 10+ years.

    Anyone who says they want to stop spending so much on defense, but they feel soooo badly for people who lose their defense jobs, doesn't really want to stop spending so much on defense.

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Tue Mar 19, 2013 at 05:17:51 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sequester Is About Slowing Down The Economy (5+ / 0-)

      Which hurts all of us. Keynes famously said when it regards spending to help a depressed economy that he didn't care if we paid people to dig ditches and then fill them up again. Long term we should go from guns to butter. Now is not the time to have that debate. The economy sees no difference between those on the left who say defense workers have it coming and those on the right who say school teachers have it coming.

      •  Respectfully, the purpose of the sequester is to (0+ / 0-)

        impose cuts to Social Security and Medicare, in exchange for tax revenue.

        Ostensibly, some of these trade-offs will be to stop the cuts to discretionary spending that Jack Lew and Rob Nabors set into motion.

        Setting up cuts to defense and SOME pet projects from discretionary spending, will create an ideal negotiating environment which will allow austerity measures to be imposed.

        So, austerity has two components:  cutting entitlements and raising tax revenues.

        Wikipedia defines austerity as:

        >In economics, austerity describes policies used by governments to reduce budget deficits during adverse economic conditions. These policies can include spending cuts, tax increases, or a mixture of the two.[3][4][5] Austerity policies demonstrate governments' liquidity to their creditors and credit rating agencies by bringing fiscal income closer to expenditure.
        That is the intended purpose of this entire Kabuki Theater.

        Slowing the economy is simply 'collateral damage.'

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


        hiddennplainsight

        by musiccitymollie on Tue Mar 19, 2013 at 08:39:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Short Term Has Long Term Implications (0+ / 0-)

          Sluggish growth will slow down the decline we are experiencing in the deficit. Another recession would reverse it. The consequences of long term unemployment currently and the declines in incomes have long term consequences as well. Hate to see that this is being used to make cuts in Social Security and Medicare and feel that Obama has misplayed his hand there. Politically a sluggish economy continuing hurts the ability to sell progressive policies. So the effect of sequester cuts to me is the priority. Hate to quote Keynes again but in the long run, we are all dead.

          •  Hey, no bone to pick with you. And I'm certainly (0+ / 0-)

            not disagreeing with you regarding the short (or long term) adverse effect on the economy for the masses.

            You made excellent points.  And I agree with them.

            Please allow me to add to your points.  

            Imagine the detrimental effect on the economy when the drop in the expendable income of today's Social Security recipients (numbering 55 plus MILLION now--without the 76-79 MILLION Boomers) begins to be felt.

            Can't imagine what the end result will be if ALL the Bowles-Simpson recommended cuts to Social Security are passed during the next 3 1/2 years.  Don't even want to go there, LOL!

            Since many recipients of Social Security old age and disability benefits are poor or low income, these transfer payments have a stimulative effect to the economy similar to UE benefits.

            And imagine when the bulk of the 76-79 MILLION Boomers retire over the next decade plus, and the net effect that their cohort will have on the economy in relation to lost, or reduced 'promised' expendable income.

            It seems that the PtB are not concerned about the economy as it pertains to "individuals."

            Their supply-side (oops--'pro-growth) economics is geared toward protecting the wealth of the One Percent.  And I perceive them to be indifferent to the potential suffering of the masses.

            Mollie

            "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


            hiddennplainsight

            by musiccitymollie on Wed Mar 20, 2013 at 02:02:44 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (170)
  • Community (76)
  • Baltimore (73)
  • Bernie Sanders (52)
  • Freddie Gray (42)
  • Civil Rights (41)
  • Elections (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Racism (26)
  • Law (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Education (22)
  • Economy (22)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Media (20)
  • Politics (19)
  • 2016 (19)
  • Environment (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site