Posted on 11/13/2012 3:53:14 PM PST by SkyPilot
During a press conference following a wreath laying ceremony at Punchbowl National Cemetery in Hawaii, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta responded to a reporter’s question regarding the whole issue of sequestration.
"Sequestration" is a fiscal policy procedure adopted by Congress to deal with the federal budget deficit. It first appeared in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Act of 1985. Simply put, sequestration is the cancellation of budgetary resources - an "automatic" form of spending cutback.
----------
And, you know, as you know from my own history dealing with budget deficits, in order to do it on a fair and effective basis, you have to look at the key areas of the federal budget. The fact is that, you know, we have addressed the discretionary area, we’ve taken almost a trillion dollars out of discretionary area and out of defense alone, almost a half a trillion dollars just out of defense."
"I think the responsibility now, both Republicans and Democrats, has to be to look at the entitlement area, what savings can be achieved on entitlements and what additional revenues need to be on the table as well. Every budget agreement that I've been a part of has involved entitlement savings, it's involved revenues and it's involved discretionary caps", he added.
“And I think those are all the pieces that have to be discussed and put together in ultimately a budget agreement that can not only avoid sequestration, but that can avoid the other problems that we're going to confront on a fiscal cliff”, Panetta said
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Panetta: We are willing to cut ten trillion out of the budget over the next century. All we want is two trillion out of the military budget over the next three years.
Boehner: Sounds reasonable. Give me a minute, I’m tearing up. I never thought we could be so bipartisan.
“Entitlements” is money given to people who did not earn it. That would not be social security and medicare becausethe people who get that benefit paid into it their who working lives and planned on it for retirement. The other plan of liberals (they held hearings on this) would is to grab everyone’s retirement funds to fund a new entitlement of retirement to replace the SS and medicare money the government stole from retirees. That is the plan of Obama.
Why? Because it’s whitey money. His entitlement voters are not middle class whites who contributed to SS and medicare and who save money for retirement. It’s racial and generational based wealth transfer. Don’t cheer him on. It’s racist and ageist theft in the name of balancing the budget.
Barring a videotape of Bath House Barry getting oral sex from Reggie Love in under the desk in the office of Air Force One while Obama talks on speaker phone to Congressional Democrats and laughs about how they electronically destroyed Romney votes while manufacturing their own - Republicans are screwed. They have no momentum, no mandate, they don't control the White House, they don't control the DoD, they don't control the Justice Dept, the FBI, the CIA, the Senate, and the media are 97% against them. Oh, and since Judas Roberts is afraid of his....ahem...."alternate" lifestyle being exposed (or whatever else they have on him), we have lost the Supreme Court also.
So here we are.
On the edge of the Fiscal Cliff.
If Sequestration takes place and the Bush tax cuts expire, the economy will go into a worse Depression than we are in now (and trust me, this is a Depression). Obama and the Democrats have only been able to mask this Depression by borrowing and spending 7 Trillion Dollars in four years.
Conservative estimates are that 2 million direct jobs will be lost with Sequestration, with more after that as the economy goes into a tailspin. The tax revenues will go down despite the tax raises, entitlement spending will go up even more logarithmically, and we probably won't crawl out of it for years. And, oh yeah, our military will become absolutely hollow almost overnight. Let's pray one of those "war thingies" doesn't happen. All we are saying, is give peace a chance.
I for one don't believe there will be any deal, and Sequestration will happen anyways. It will become everyone's poison to drink at that point. Why? Because I have never seen our government at any level behave responsibly in the last 5 years. At every turn, they have done the wrong thing.
Some people argue "Let sequestration happen! Burn it all down! Better sooner than later!" They don't really realize that we still have a chance to save the country if (and ONLY if) entitlements are drastically reformed.
Maybe I will be surprised. Maybe Obama will double cross the media, the liberals, the unions, the illegals, and the rest of the godless rabble. That would be sweet revenge to see them twist their hair out.
In any case, if Sequestration happens, the economy will behave like an ice skater doing a twirl and bringing her arms in. Faster, and faster......
Sadly, you are absolutely correct.
If Social Security had not been raided under Johnson, and if SSDI was a separate program, then Social Security would be solvent for the next 50 years.
If Sequestration goes through and the tax cuts expire in the "fiscal cliff" that everyone keeps talking about, then your SS and Medicare is in great jeopardy. That's just the way it is.
And THAT is what Obama must soon face.
Yes, but then Obama and the Leftists in the United States are outed for the dumb asses they are.
Can you imagine the gains in 2014, if we sink back into a recession or worse?
BTW: I think we have been in a depression. I don't agree the recession was over. We just quit counting people.
We know there are 23 million out of work, and tens of millions more earning 50 to 75% of what they were five to ten years ago.
I call that a depression.
I think we're at a low point, but the pendulum is going to swing the other way soon.
We both know this can't go on, and we are a very resilient nation. I'm not seeking to downplay our situation, because I am angry about it. I just think we're going to shock the world when we get back on the right track.
The bright side is, Socialism will have been given a chance in the U. S. It will have failed miserably. That will be the end of that.
I hope it works out this way.
I'd prefer that the Republicans just let this thing crash. Of course Boehner won't, but that's what I'd prefer. All we can do for the next 4 years is "Go Galt" and minimize work and taxes, so we don't feed the monster.
how does the saying go? “We deserve the government we vote for”
Sue the law makers they are the ones who robbed SS
If Repugs delete SS and Medicare “entitlements” w/o cutting education, welfare, EBT’s, EPA, DHS, etc., they won’t have a party left.
It’s a plan to gouge and harm whites - Repug voters - and transfer their benefits to the hipsters and minorities for entitlements for them. It will be spent on Obamacare.
In other words, the overspending won’t stop because entitlements will be expanded for Dem voters.
It’s a screw job on older whites who don’t vote for Dems but do for Republicans.
I have a question. Do these people who have been on food stamps and welfare all their lives get SS when they get 65? And Medicare?
I bet it will be means testing for SS and Medicare cost sharing for those they deem can afford it.
I bet it will be means testing for SS and Medicare cost sharing for those they deem can afford it.
To get SS you have to have a certain amount of working years--I think it's 40 quarters, or ten years--over your lifetime. Your benefits depend on how much you earned.
So, I doubt they get SS. I suppose they would get some sort of welfare, continued food stamps, and continued Medicaid.
“Yes, but then Obama and the Leftists in the United States are outed for the dumb asses they are.”
No, unfortunately he will blame the GOP controlled House and it will stick in the public’s eyes. Does anyone realistically think the ghetto voter that helped Obama get reelected cares about the economy? That individual has NO intention of getting employment even if jobs are plentiful. They simply want their government checks and nothing else.
You make sense as far as your logic goes.
You do realize that it wasn’t the ghetto folks who put this prick back in the White House though right?
Middle class idiots jumped right back in with both feet.
There are enough decent middle-class people in this nation to prevent this guy from being re-elected. Some of them still bought off on this guy being their hero.
Many people in this nation sold themselves out.
We had the ex-military. I can’t believe they would not see this guy for what he is. We should have had the middle-class whites.
I do think we had people who were sick of voting for RINOs, and didn’t vote for either guy.
It hurts, but it is what it is.
If the RNC ever allows us to have a Conservative candidate again, we may just win a presidential election. Until then, they are actually our biggest enemy.
Under Bush & Congress the Deficit increased 43% in 8 years. Under Obama & Congress the Deficity doubled that of Bush’s (86%) in 4 years. If you want to fix the probem, we need to find out “what” caused this increase and address that. Not too much has really changed under Bush vs. Obama. In fact under Bush we had 9/11, a “real” war (with bombs dropped), and a hurricance that cost much more than Sandy. Sandy doesn’t even account for the 86% increase. What did Obama and Congress spend it on? They need to look that First in order to address their fiscal problems.
Under Bush & Congress the Deficit increased 43% in 8 years. Under Obama & Congress the Deficity doubled that of Bush’s (86%) in 4 years. If you want to fix the probem, we need to find out “what” caused this increase and address that. Not too much has really changed under Bush vs. Obama. In fact under Bush we had 9/11, a “real” war (with bombs dropped), and a hurricance that cost much more than Sandy. Sandy doesn’t even account for the 86% increase. What did Obama and Congress spend it on? They need to look that First in order to address their fiscal problems.
"Federal entitlements are driving this spending growth, having increased from less than half of total federal outlays just 20 years ago to nearly 62 percent in 2012. Three major programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—dominate in size and growth, soaking up about 44 percent of the budget. All three programs are growing faster than inflation, and—when joined with $1.7 trillion in new Obamacare spending—will drain about 18.5 percent of the nation’s total economic output by mid-century. Because that is about the historical annual average of total federal tax revenue, it means all other government programs—national defense, veterans health care, transportation, federal law enforcement, and others—would effectively have to be financed on borrowed money.
Other entitlements continue growing as well. Anti-poverty programs have surged by 49 percent in just the past decade, even after adjusting for inflation. Spending for food stamps alone has more than tripled since 2002. Health programs, including Medicaid, have increased by 38 percent, and housing assistance by 48 percent. Although these entitlement programs have dominated the government’s spending growth, discretionary spending—spending authorized by annual appropriations bills—also has grown by 40 percent more than inflation, to $1.289 trillion. Spending on non-defense programs has grown 29 percent. These outlays peaked in 2010 due to the stimulus bill, but remain 7 percent higher than their pre-stimulus level of 2008.
Bear this in mind: Defense spending is the only major discretionary program that has been cut (by Billions) in the last few years. Defense spending is also at a near historic low in percentage of GNP. It is also one of the few programs actually mandated by the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.