Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I've heard of farm subsidies but never heard oil subsidies. Your saying we are paying companies to not drill oil? Also you keep seperating welfare into food stamps when its much more then that. Its extends into education, health care, housing, etc...

We subsidize oil by leasing the land dirt cheap between $2-$10 per an acre. Pay for roads and infrastructure to drilling sites and provide free geological information via the USGS. In places where American companies are drilling in foreign countries we pay for security military or private. The estimate is if we quite using tax payer dollars for oil production the cost would be about $10/gallon. Obviously we are not an economy that could sustain prices that high so we need to have some oil subsidies to maintain the economy.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

We subsidize oil by leasing the land dirt cheap between $2-$10 per an acre. Pay for roads and infrastructure to drilling sites and provide free geological information via the USGS. In places where American companies are drilling in foreign countries we pay for security military or private. The estimate is if we quite using tax payer dollars for oil production the cost would be about $10/gallon. Obviously we are not an economy that could sustain prices that high so we need to have some oil subsidies to maintain the economy.

Well if its tax payers money paying for all of that would it not be part of the economy. Another words whats the difference in paying higher taxes v/s paying higher gas prices? I would also guess the US leases it land cheaper because of the cost to drill in the US and the fact we are not an oil rich nation.

[BaltimoreSkins]

For your first question I would guess it is to provide gasoline, petrochemicals and plastics affordable to everyone. The law for leasing mining and drilling rights on public land dates back to the 1890s and was never adjusted until the 1990s. I too would guess that it is to keep oil competitive. In 2006 it costs $2 to produce a barrel of oil in Saudi Arabia and it cost between $30 and $45 in Canada/Alaska. Regardless with prices at $90 per a barrel someone is making a huge profit, but not subsidizing it would make it less profitable and costs American jobs.

[CRedskinsRule]

ABC7News ‏@ABC7News

The Department of Housing and Urban Development will furlough all 9,000 employees for 7 days between May, August. Sequestration 2013: HUD to furlough all 9,000 employees for seven days | WJLA.com
Retweeted by Yahoo! News

I hate it for the individual employees, but if you are in favor of reducing govt (which I am), these stories will be more prevalent.

[CRedskinsRule]

all is good.

President Obama: There Is No Debt Crisis - Yahoo! News

so I give to you:

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

ABC7News ‏@ABC7News

The Department of Housing and Urban Development will furlough all 9,000 employees for 7 days between May, August. Sequestration 2013: HUD to furlough all 9,000 employees for seven days | WJLA.com
Retweeted by Yahoo! News

I hate it for the individual employees, but if you are in favor of reducing govt (which I am), these stories will be more prevalent.

I am a federal employee facing 14 furlough days (set to start April 21). That said, I think sequestration (more reduced spending is needed!) is good for the country.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I am a federal employee facing 14 furlough days (set to start April 21). That said, I think sequestration (more reduced spending is needed!) is good for the country.

as a taxpayer, I am positive the loss of 14 days pays will be very rough on you. But I absolutely appreciate your attitude. And, personally, I want to say Thank You for your understanding!

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I am a federal employee facing 14 furlough days (set to start April 21). That said, I think sequestration (more reduced spending is needed!) is good for the country.

Personally I think your paying the price because ours leaders are too lazy to find the waste and other cuts that would actually help. Those cuts don't draw the attention like cutting employees hours and pay.

[Daseal]

FD, the sequestration was meant to be the poison pill. Trying to cut a flat 15% is a bad idea, everyone agrees with that. Just because you see X cuts on news, there are also other more subtle cuts that aren't sensational enough to make the news.

This thread, by itself, has proven why this is difficult. To over simplify, the right wants more cuts primarily to social programs. The left wants additional taxes and cutting more military type spending. Lets cut both, raise taxes, and get our budget right.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Daseal

FD, the sequestration was meant to be the poison pill. Trying to cut a flat 15% is a bad idea, everyone agrees with that. Just because you see X cuts on news, there are also other more subtle cuts that aren't sensational enough to make the news.

This thread, by itself, has proven why this is difficult. To over simplify, the right wants more cuts primarily to social programs. The left wants additional taxes and cutting more military type spending. Lets cut both, raise taxes, and get our budget right.

I think the big problem trying to do taxes and cutting together, is that the taxes always go through when approved, not any real cuts. The cuts are either political gimmicks (We only increased our spending on X by 100 million $ instead of the $200 million $ we planned for last year. We took a 100 million $ cut on X!!!!!!!!!), or made out to be poison pills. (Let's not cut USDA wine-tasting conferences, let's furlough meat inspectors. LINK)

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Personally I think your paying the price because ours leaders are too lazy to find the waste and other cuts that would actually help. Those cuts don't draw the attention like cutting employees hours and pay.

Not Lazy ...scared is more like it,they don't want to make the hard choices and maybe even have to agree to another parties cuts and then face the voters back at home.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Daseal

FD, the sequestration was meant to be the poison pill. Trying to cut a flat 15% is a bad idea, everyone agrees with that. Just because you see X cuts on news, there are also other more subtle cuts that aren't sensational enough to make the news.

This thread, by itself, has proven why this is difficult. To over simplify, the right wants more cuts primarily to social programs. The left wants additional taxes and cutting more military type spending. Lets cut both, raise taxes, and get our budget right.

The cuts are 2.4% of the budget and represent a small % of the increases jn the 2013 budget.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The cuts are 2.4% of the budget and represent a small % of the increases jn the 2013 budget.

Just goes to show if there's even a real cut to the increase of government spending, the White House and Congress will both squeal and cry like stereotypical screaming toddlers in a public place.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Just goes to show if there's even a real cut to the increase of government spending, the White House and Congress will both squeal and cry like stereotypical screaming toddlers in a public place.

That's also true with the public in general.

[CRedskinsRule]

for those saying there is complaining about the air show cuts,

why don't we just cut this program instead?

Ships Costing U.S. $37 Billion Lack Firepower, Navy Told - Yahoo! Finance