And now, with the sequester still looming, Congress will be taking next week off. Who are these clowns working for. At the very least, they could give the impression that they're trying to solve the problem. BOHICA!

quote:

Originally posted by SubChop:
And now, with the sequester still looming, Congress will be taking next week off. Who are these clowns working for. At the very least, they could give the impression that they're trying to solve the problem. BOHICA!

They never have. Sounds like your figuring it out. Prepare to join the "old and cynical" club.

It never ceases to amaze me that 500+ people claim to want basically the same things - better economy, lower deficit, more jobs, etc - and campaign on those issues, yet can rarely come to agreement on a way to achieve those promises.

Today the Early Bird contains an article that discusses the shift from solving the problem to assigning blame for it. EVERY ONE of our elected officials is to blame. This issue was first put on the table in 2011 for f$ck sake!

Really, this is yet another example of Republicans demonstrating the same "My Way or the Highway" attitude they'd had since leading us to war in Iraq based on a hoax concocted to get their way.

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:
Really, this is yet another example of Republicans demonstrating the same "My Way or the Highway" attitude they'd had since leading us to war in Iraq based on a hoax concocted to get their way.

Really?

The sequester was Obama's idea in the first place. He stated shortly after it passed that he would veto any effort to find an easy way out and now, that it is staring him in the face, he wants the easy way out. And, finally, he got his tax increase just last month.

I suppose this is leadership, Obama-style.

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:
Really, this is yet another example of Republicans demonstrating the same "My Way or the Highway" attitude they'd had since leading us to war in Iraq based on a hoax concocted to get their way.

Again, all of our elected officials are to blame. Obama proposed this nearly two years ago and has failed to lead Congress toward resolving the issue. Epic fail! Having said this, the Republicans agreed to a tax hike last month as Hangfire points out. What ground have the Dems given on this issue?

quote:

Originally posted by SubChop:

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:
Really, this is yet another example of Republicans demonstrating the same "My Way or the Highway" attitude they'd had since leading us to war in Iraq based on a hoax concocted to get their way.

Again, all of our elected officials are to blame. Obama proposed this nearly two years ago and has failed to lead Congress toward resolving the issue. Epic fail! Having said this, the Republicans agreed to a tax hike last month as Hangfire points out. What ground have the Dems given on this issue?

Let's talk about the "Party of No"--
House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and their fellow Republicans are not about to work seriously on new gun control measures, or a new jobs program ("Fix-It-First," which would put the jobless to work repairing bridges and other infrastructure), or more federal "investment" in private clean-energy companies, or a increase in the federal minimum wage, indexed for inflation. These guys are a joke and headed for obsolescence as their inaction hurts many whose votes they need.

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:

Let's talk about the "Party of No"--
House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and their fellow Republicans are not about to work seriously on new gun control measures, or a new jobs program ("Fix-It-First," which would put the jobless to work repairing bridges and other infrastructure), or more federal "investment" in private clean-energy companies, or a increase in the federal minimum wage, indexed for inflation. These guys are a joke and headed for obsolescence as their inaction hurts many whose votes they need.

How about we discuss the 537 elected officials in this countries highest offices. I'll bet every one campaigned - in one form or another - to reduce crime, increase jobs/wages, cut the deficit and increase national security. If all those people have the power and the same goals, why do we still have these problems? We don't need to get a majority of the 300+ million Americans to agree on any one thing. We need the majority of 537 people.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SubChop,

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:

House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and their fellow Republicans are not about to work seriously on new gun control measures,

BTW, I like Biden's idea of gun control - let everyone have a shotgun for home defense!

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:

quote:

Originally posted by SubChop:

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Wu:
Really, this is yet another example of Republicans demonstrating the same "My Way or the Highway" attitude they'd had since leading us to war in Iraq based on a hoax concocted to get their way.

Again, all of our elected officials are to blame. Obama proposed this nearly two years ago and has failed to lead Congress toward resolving the issue. Epic fail! Having said this, the Republicans agreed to a tax hike last month as Hangfire points out. What ground have the Dems given on this issue?

Let's talk about the "Party of No"--
House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and their fellow Republicans are not about to work seriously on new gun control measures, or a new jobs program ("Fix-It-First," which would put the jobless to work repairing bridges and other infrastructure), or more federal "investment" in private clean-energy companies, or a increase in the federal minimum wage, indexed for inflation. These guys are a joke and headed for obsolescence as their inaction hurts many whose votes they need.

You've got Obama's talking points down pretty well.

Let's talk about the party of No. No budget in 4 years. Not willing to even take up any of the budgets passed in the house. Seems to me that the Dems are the real party of NO.

Gun control: We have already discussed this ad nauseum here. There is a significant block of people who don't believe that any more gun control, as it is being talked about by the Dems, will actually accomplish anything to decrease violence. Just because they don't think it will work and thus is infringing on the rights of citizens to no purpose other than to infringe on those rights does not make this stance obstructionist. Men and good conscience should be able to disagree but, for this Admin. it is my way or the highway that constitutes compromise.

Fix it first: We've been there already. Remember all those shovel ready projects that would be accomplished by the stimulous? This is just more of the same and would likely result in just more payoffs to Obama's campaign contributors. Fooled me once........... No reason to go there again as this Pres has no credibility on this.

No to any restructuring of the real drivers of our debt.

Who's the party of no? Your's is an old tune that no longer is on key.

I just listened to an online briefing by two Under SECDEFs (Comptroller and Personnel) regarding the sequester and furloughs mainly. Nothing knew from them specifically, but what really caught my attention was the Q&A portion which followed. It was as if the light bulbs had just lit up above the reporter's heads. Example, "Do you mean that 800,000 civilians could lose 20% of their remaining annual salaries?" "Are you saying that essential services will be curtailed (i.e. medical treatment facilities which are staffed at 40% by civilians)?", etc. etc.

They're just now starting to understand part of the impact of sequester.

One specific question that illustrates my point (now that I have the transcript - and I'm paraphrasing slightly):

Q: How much of this -- because we've seen a lot of what appears to be a kind of scare tactics from -- from the services that really seem to be pushing out a message of -- of cutting kind of security issue things, like readiness. And what's the reality of readiness really being throttled -- throttled back here? You know, we're still at war, and what the message is, is that this, you know, has a long-term effect and you might have to keep troops on the ground longer.

I mean, is this something that will -- kind of allowed to be happening?

A: If neither get fixed (the Continuing Resolution and the sequestration), if we see the CR extended through the year in its current form and sequestration lasted a year, I think we're going to have serious readiness effects. I don't know where we're going to get the money. These are legally binding limits (i.e. can only move money around betwwen appropriations within certain limits).

Under Sec Hale "But if -- again, if the CR stays in effect and sequestration goes into effect for the whole year, I think we're going to see serious effects. I am worried."

So yes, this is being allowed to happen!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SubChop,

The House just passed a budget bill that would guarantee furloughs. Now it's on to the President for signature.

I am lost here and admit I am mathematically challenged. 20 day lay offs are proposed. I assume that translates to one month of work. (four five day weeks)If furloughs start in June that is one of six months remaining or 1/6 of pay. Am I figuring it out correctly?

Can I assume they cannot (will not) lay off any uniformed personnel?

You're close. We can be furloughed up to 22 days (don't know why that is the magic number). Based on the required notifications (we're expecting a certified letter in the mail on Monday or Tuesday) and a week to appeal (VERY unlikely to be reversed) they are telling us to expect an unpaid day a week for the remaining FY, beginning the end of April. This works out to about a 20% cut of each paycheck for the remainder of the fiscal year.

Military personnel will not (can not?) be furloughed.