Americans’ reaction to sequestration might change course of politics

[dkf]

Already, a decade of budget deficits run up in war and economic crisis has saddled the government with a $16 trillion debt, a bill that will force the country to come to grips with how much government it wants and how much it wants to pay for it at the very time the aging baby boomers put new strains on the budget through such vast programs as Medicare and Social Security.

Now the government is about to start cutting spending in some programs, offering a first look at how the American people will react.

If people feel the sting of the so-called sequestration with fewer teachers at their schools, more time in airport security lines and smaller checks for people without jobs, they might rise up and send a clear signal that the country really wants to keep all of the government it now gets and perhaps feed a demand that the government charge more in the form of higher taxes.

If, however, the majority of Americans don’t feel any pain from the cuts, if they either don’t see an impact or don’t empathize with federal employees enduring unpaid furloughs, they’d likely invite more moves to cut spending. That would bolster the Republicans.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/03/01/184621/americans-reaction-to-sequestration.html#storylink=cpy

[FarCenter]

1. A 5% cut to civilian spending and a 7.8% cut in defense won't cause much reaction

Besides, a lot of it is focused in specific geographies, such as DC and areas around military bases and contractors. These areas have largely escaped the recession since 2008 and are likely to get limited sympathy from the rest of the populace.

Schadenfreude is the likely reaction.

[aristocles]

2. Exactly! n/t

[PSPS]

3. This opinion piece can't be taken seriously

The giveaway that this isn't a serious piece is revealed in the very first sentence:

Already, a decade of budget deficits run up in war and economic crisis has saddled the government with a $16 trillion debt, a bill that will force the country to come to grips with how much government it wants and how much it wants to pay for it at the very time the aging baby boomers put new strains on the budget through such vast programs as Medicare and Social Security.

1. The fact is that Social Security is not really a part of "the government" as the author uses the term. It is a separately-financed pension system that runs a $2.5 trillion surplus which was designed into it specifically because of the bubble of "aging baby boomers."

2. If, indeed, the debt is due to "a decade of budget deficits run up in war and economic crisis," isn't that where we should be looking for savings? Why make grandma pay for Bush's wars of choice, the banksters theft of our treasury and the rich escaping paying any taxes?

This article is intended to shape opinion, not seriously discuss anything.

[southernyankeebelle]

4. I already called both congressman and senator and told them both I would hold them

responsible. I also sent emails making the same statements.

[rgbecker]

5. The problem isn't the 85 billion in cuts before Oct. of 2013

It's the ten year affect on the economy which will mean 750,000 fewer employed.

The American people will see the impact, and Fox news and the other liers will tell them it is because of Obama's lack of leadership.


Read up on the long term effects.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/20/the-sequester-absolutely-everything-you-could-possibly-need-to-know-in-one-faq/