Sequester 2013

[kalm]

Cut 2013 Federal spending 2% from 2012's actual and limit increases in spending, taxes and benefits to 75% of inflation going forward. Tighten up deductions and loop holes and reduce rates to reduce the opportunities and incentives to cheat.

Peg the top rate @ 33% and put in a new low rate at the bottom on lower income amounts that will hit virtually everyone. Eliminate instances where individuals get more back in refunds and credits than they paid in.

In other words, the working poor need skin in the game and we should continue with the Reaganomics.

I get this desire, but they will also be the most affected by the spending cuts. You're then going to raise taxes on a group that already spends every cent they earn and saves very little to nothing. Should they be purchasing iphones, late model cars, and flat screens? No, but Apple, Honda, and LG are sure glad they do - as is the rest of the economy.

Meanwhile, someone paying the top marginal rate gets a tax break. We've already seen the relatively non-stimulative affect of providing people who will be just fine anyways with tax breaks.

We have a spending problem AND a wage problem.

[GannonFan]

Cut 2013 Federal spending 2% from 2012's actual and limit increases in spending, taxes and benefits to 75% of inflation going forward. Tighten up deductions and loop holes and reduce rates to reduce the opportunities and incentives to cheat.

Peg the top rate @ 33% and put in a new low rate at the bottom on lower income amounts that will hit virtually everyone. Eliminate instances where individuals get more back in refunds and credits than they paid in.

In other words, the working poor need skin in the game and we should continue with the Reaganomics.

I get this desire, but they will also be the most affected by the spending cuts. You're then going to raise taxes on a group that already spends every cent they earn and saves very little to nothing. Should they be purchasing iphones, late model cars, and flat screens? No, but Apple, Honda, and LG are sure glad they do - as is the rest of the economy.

Meanwhile, someone paying the top marginal rate gets a tax break. We've already seen the relatively non-stimulative affect of providing people who will be just fine anyways with tax breaks.

We have a spending problem AND a wage problem.

We've also seen the non-stimulative affect of driving up government debt to give to those people who spend every cent of it. Spending for spending's sake doesn't stimulate the economy. If it did then idea's like Bush's $500 refund check for everyone would be repeated over and over.

You keep coming back to the wage problem, which is of course a way to stop using the terms income gap or income inequality. There's just not going to be an effective or fruitful way to minimize that gap, no matter how much you want there to be.

[93henfan]

Good news for Hogan and 93HenFan

The Pentagon will sharply cut the number of unpaid furlough days civilians will be forced to take over the next several months from 22 to 14, defense officials said Wednesday, reducing the impact of automatic budget cuts on as many as 700,000 workers.

Under the new plan, the unpaid furloughs would not begin until mid-June, with notices going out before that.

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/394/326 ... days-to-14" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So now it'll be a 20% pay cut for three and a half months instead of five. Better, but still painful. I'm glad Hagel actually cares, unlike Obama or Congress.