Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And another thing, our GDP is going to shrink because of these cuts but maybe they are needed. Although I don't see how furloughing a employee once a week isn't going to be detrimental to the economy.
While GDP may shrink how will these cuts cause that? The government is still going to spend more this year than last year.
While GDP may shrink how will these cuts cause that? The government is still going to spend more this year than last year.
The GDP shrunk last year of the last quarter due to government spending slowing or being cut and the cuts being made weren't in the same fashion as this sequester. With employees being furloughed, that means less spending which ultimately results in a lower GDP. This will probably the first time the DC region ever really faces a slow down, but not by much. I know my homestate, Maryland, is finally deciding to diversify its economy more because we depend on high gov't spending and these cuts will cut the states GDP.
And it doesn't matter if the gov't spends more per year every year and never hires another employee, its inflation that keeps the budget increasing at its current rate. The only reason why Obama is considered one of the slowest spenders in history is because the budget's congress has to keep creating are only growing to match inflation. So if I give you a dollar last year, this year that same dollar last value therefore I need to give you a bit more change to match the value of the dollar you received last year; imagine that scenario on a larger, trillion dollar scale. With sequester the budget is still going to grow by 2% I believe, as opposed to the 7% it was originally supposed to grow, and thats why furlough's have to occur. The gov't may not have hired any employees but the value of the dollar has decreased therefore the budget needed to grow or in a sense the employees are being payed less. I know this same scenario occurs with minimum wage as well, people back in the 60's, 70's or, 80's were paid less but the value of the dollar was far stronger back then with much more purchasing power, so although they made say $4 an hour (I don't know the min. wage back in those days so thats just an hypothetical number) it was worth more than our $7.50 thats being paid today.
SN: I've made an example a few times on this site in the past regarding inflation; eventually (like 20 or 30 years down the road) the amount of debt that we have today ($16.5 trillion) will be considered a healthy amount of debt for a GDP our size in the future.
The GDP shrunk last year of the last quarter due to government spending slowing or being cut and the cuts being made weren't in the same fashion as this sequester. With employees being furloughed, that means less spending which ultimately results in a lower GDP. This will probably the first time the DC region ever really faces a slow down, but not by much. I know my homestate, Maryland, is finally deciding to diversify its economy more because we depend on high gov't spending and these cuts will cut the states GDP.
Again, we are going to spend more this year than last year, why should anyone be furloughed?
Quote:
And it doesn't matter if the gov't spends more per year every year and never hires another employee, its inflation that keeps the budget increasing at its current rate. The only reason why Obama is considered one of the slowest spenders in history is because the budget's congress has to keep creating are only growing to match inflation. So if I give you a dollar last year, this year that same dollar last value therefore I need to give you a bit more change to match the value of the dollar you received last year; imagine that scenario on a larger, trillion dollar scale. With sequester the budget is still going to grow by 2% I believe, as opposed to the 7% it was originally supposed to grow, and thats why furlough's have to occur. The gov't may not have hired any employees but the value of the dollar has decreased therefore the budget needed to grow or in a sense the employees are being payed less. I know this same scenario occurs with minimum wage as well, people back in the 60's, 70's or, 80's were paid less but the value of the dollar was far stronger back then with much more purchasing power, so although they made say $4 an hour (I don't know the min. wage back in those days so thats just an hypothetical number) it was worth more than our $7.50 thats being paid today.
The increase was supposed to be 9.5%. It's going to be 7%, the government says inflation last year was 1.7%.
While GDP may shrink how will these cuts cause that? The government is still going to spend more this year than last year.
Because Obama's narrative is that there's no possible way to cut 85 billion dollars out of the budget without losing thousands and thousands of jobs. So the cuts will have disastrous ripple effects throughout the economy. And the liberals believe him.
He said he'd cut the deficit in half and he didn't. He said unemployment would never go above 8% and it did. He said Citizens United was going to cause corporations to take over the country and it didn't. He said he was going to reset our foreign relations and he didn't. He said the stimulus would provide the people with shovel ready jobs and it didn't. He said you would be able to keep your existing healthcare and you can't. He said healthcare costs would go down and they didn't.
Each time he said something liberals believed him. Each time it didn't happen he blamed Republicans and they believe him. Each time he says something new, they believe the new claim.
How can you sit there and blame one part of the governemtn while ignoring the Congress that controls the purse strings of the country? That shows one of two things, either that you are totally ignorant on how the governemnt works or you hatered of the current president is so deep all logic is tossed to the wayside.
I can understand the fraustration regarding this matter, but come on it took bush 8 year to screw up the country and obama came in with the leading republicans fighting to block everything that they can BEFORE he even took office! I guess that part of the conversation eluded many of you. This buttwipes are still fighting against anything that he does even if it is their own ideas. I do not agree with everything that obama does, but why all of the sudden republicans decide that the budget is the most important thing AFTER bush ran it up like a drunken sailor on shore leave? Now you have that turtle looking weirdo whathisface, girlieboy lindsey, the cryptkeeper mccain and that beady-eyed bastasd bonner playing crips and bloods with the American people! Those week kneed dumbocrats are partially to blame as well, crooked azz pelosi, those coward blue mutt democrats.
Some of you are pissed because he is black but are scared to admit it, others totally ignore the fact that he only signs bills and does not create them, and some of you that are bitching have not voted since Reagen was in office.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
