In response to:

The Sequester May Not Be “Fair,” but It’s Real and It Would Slow the Growth of Government

Arley2 Wrote: Jan 29, 2013 2:29 PM
In my view Congress should freeze budgets and spending at the current level which would balance the budget in maybe three years................but that's a guess since Harry Reid and the Senate hasn't produced a budget in four years. That would mean zero spending growth. Zero new spending programs at all. Zero growth of any department or agency budget. What I'd REALLY like to see is about a ten percent cut across the board in all departments, all agencies, Congressional pay, including a ten percent reduction of ALL personnel positions at all pay grade levels.
Ms Kelly Wrote: Jan 29, 2013 6:46 PM
Arley: There are lots of ways to fix the US economy and even our national debt. The problem is, our so called national leaders don't have the will to do any of it. Our problems are not about "not knowing" how to fix things. Our problems are that we have a bunch of cowards running the country.
canetoad Wrote: Jan 29, 2013 10:35 PM
Time to run for office Ms Kelly so you can sort it all out. I'll be waiting to see your name on the ballot.

Much to the horror of various interest groups, it appears that there will be a “sequester” on March 1.

This means an automatic reduction in spending authority for selected programs (interest payments are exempt, as are most entitlement outlays).

Just about everybody in Washington is frantic about the sequester, which supposedly will mean “savage” and “draconian” budget cuts.

If only. That would be like porn for libertarians.

In reality, the sequester merely means a reduction in the growth of federal spending. Even if we have the sequester, the burden of government spending will still be

Related Tags: Government