Friday, February 22, 2013
How Federal Spending Would Be Cut Under the Sequester
This article talks about the various cuts that could be made under the sequester. What do you know about the sequester? Do you think the government is making the right department cuts? What else should we look at cutting in order to help balance our economy?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The sequester refers to the reduction of the government spending to have a sustainable economy. To reach this, the White House created a congressional super committee with members of both main parties, Democrats and Republicans, to reach an agreement with both parties and point of views. This pretend to create a balance with the power. However, the sequester failed in its goal by the lack of agreement between the members. Although I think the government is making the right department cuts, the government should do an analyze in cost-benefit that I doubt that the government made it. The problem is not only the cuts, but also the investment that the government is making. The situation is getting worse because each parties are pending of their interests intead of the whole people.
ReplyDeleteI didn't know much at all about the sequester until reading Priscila's post, which helped me understand exactly what it was. I certainly agree with the government that we need to cut defense spending, as we spend a lot more on our military than any other country. Personally, I think we should cut military spending even more instead of cutting education, housing, or transportation, which I believe are much more valuable to the US population as a whole.
ReplyDeleteThe sequester is a scary thing in a still recovering economy, Paul Krugman talks about austerity in Europe here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/25/opinion/krugman-austerity-italian-style.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 . This sounds eerily possible for the US's economy to contract with these across the board cuts.
ReplyDeleteBalancing the Federal budget, what a job! Keep in mind the sequester is scheduled to take place this Friday! Assuming everything happens on schedule, we will be seeing rippled effects of the cuts in the next few month/ year to come.
ReplyDeleteIn term of the cuts being made, I find it very interesting that defense counts for one half of the sequester. Though I do think it is valuable to cut defense before social programs, 50% still seem like a very high percentage. The second largest cut will be on housing, education, and transportation program. Keep in mind how this will affect our lives. At Kalamazoo College, many students receive scholarship and/or financial aid. The sequester will change the amount of financial aid awarded thus affecting who is able to attend K.
From reading the article, it seems like Washington still has a lot to figure out in terms of exactly where to cut spending, to what extend, and the likely outcome of their decisions. Four days does not seem like enough time to make such drastic decisions. Until decisions are settled, it looks like our economy is in the hands of Washington.
I don't think that the government is making the right cuts. All of these proposed cuts to be made, were set as an incentive to do something otherwise. 50-50 cuts to republican interests, and equally to democratic concerns, were supposed to motivate both parties to negotiate a settlement otherwise, that would be more favorable in the long run. Neither side really favors the sequester as it stands.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if one side is less hurt by the effects of this vast spending cut, it would be the Republican party. In general, they are chief advocates of less government spending. Despite the fact that the sequester encompasses 50% of it's bulk in military cuts something that all Republican war-mongers loathe), it is a pill that can be swallowed, when the other 50% of cuts go to democratic programs simultaneously. Because neither side seems willing to budge on this issue, the sequester may very well come into effect this Friday.