Comments on: The sequester cuts are too deep? More like, not deep enough

By: GWB

GWB — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:04:14 +0000

levi on February 27, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Exactly

By: Fenris

Fenris — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:01:41 +0000

Steven on February 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM

I keep trying to make the same point, but I think we’re pissing into the wind. People who agree are already apoplectic about the continuing goodspeak and everyone else is saying “so what?”.

By: Steven

Steven — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:21:15 +0000

The cuts are not deep enough because there are no cuts.

A decrease in the rate of acceleration is not the same thing as slowing down; it’s speeding up more slowly.

Only in the fetid swamp of Washington D.C. could a decrease in the rate of growth be called a budget cut. In the rest of the world, it’s just slightly slower growth.

By: levi

levi — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:48:46 +0000

When Obama said it will cost two million jobs to cut about 2 percent of the federal budget he expects us to gasp in horror.

I did gasp in horro. If two f’ing percent of the budget is TWO MILLION jobs our gov’t is waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too big and needs to be slashed much more.

By: Gatsu

Gatsu — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:34:50 +0000

Bottom line is that the oceans will freeze AND dry up, billions of species will go extinct, fires will burn unchecked, and trillions will die if we don’t do something to avert this man caused disaster that is known as the sequester, or “all the republicans fault” as Obamas been calling it.

By: MoreLiberty

MoreLiberty — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:32:57 +0000

If I was forced to adjust my budget last month because of the increase in Payroll taxes – 2% of my income – then the federal behemoth that is our government should be able to adjust theirs.