Sequester Apocalypse, everything shuts down friday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
many of the furloughs wont hit until april since they require 30 day notices


For most Fed Gov employees that is correct. But the contractors can be let go day one. That and if some agencies decide on Rifs those would also happen at a differant pace.

So the effect will not be one big bang like many think but a slow drop that picks up until October when the new budget year goes into affect.
 

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
For most Fed Gov employees that is correct. But the contractors can be let go day one. That and if some agencies decide on Rifs those would also happen at a differant pace.

So the effect will not be one big bang like many think but a slow drop that picks up until October when the new budget year goes into affect.

Most contracts have termination clauses, and some amount of money is paid in advance. Government employees can be furloughed fast without any penalties.
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
Cant wait. Fed pay is not frozen didnt the president and the justices and congress and everyone on SS just get voted a raise????

Yes it is. Except for the cockroaches in Congress and their cronies of course:

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/697/2182637/Federal-pay-freeze-QA

Q: Are the salaries of congressional staffers affected by the pay freeze?
A: No. Congressional staffers are paid out of legislative branch funding dictated by the Speaker of the House.
 
Last edited:

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
406252_519547338111343_1945458084_n.jpg
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,780
8,355
136


Good point. But I'd like to think that if that pipeline of lobbyist and citizen's united $$$$ were threatened in unison by the majority working class constituents, we'd actually have a functioning Congress looking to float all boats rather than a Congress looking to build only aircraft carriers and yachts. ;)
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Good point. But I'd like to think that if that pipeline of lobbyist and citizen's united $$$$ were threatened in unison by the majority working class constituents, we'd actually have a functioning Congress looking to float all boats rather than a Congress looking to build only aircraft carriers and yachts. ;)

Oh, don't worry - the Democrats get to spend tons of money on their pet boondoggles as well, such as $59/gal biofuels for those "Great Green Fleet" aircraft carrers and planes to feed their environmentalist fetishes.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,780
8,355
136
Oh, don't worry - the Democrats get to spend tons of money on their pet boondoggles as well, such as $59/gal biofuels for those "Great Green Fleet" aircraft carrers and planes to feed their environmentalist fetishes.

Good find. I'll see your biofuel and raise you another Iraq war with a side bet Halliburton thrown in. ;)
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,606
46,263
136
Oh, don't worry - the Democrats get to spend tons of money on their pet boondoggles as well, such as $59/gal biofuels for those "Great Green Fleet" aircraft carrers and planes to feed their environmentalist fetishes.

The Air Force is using bio-jet fuel to fuel the Navy's nuclear powered aircraft carriers? :hmm:


The military in general has been working for at least the last decade to diversify their fuel supply for strategic reasons.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Believe me, I work with these people, and they are not a happy crowd.

How would you like a 20% pay cut from about mid April to the end of the FY (Sept 30).


Seeing as average government pay is now more than the private sector, I say so what.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Good find. I'll see your biofuel and raise you another Iraq war with a side bet Halliburton thrown in. ;)

You might have a point *if* we were talking about past spending rather than future spending. We can't have the money back we spent on the Iraq war, likewise the money spent on the "War on Poverty" is gone forever. But we certainly can stop spending the money on stupid bullshit going forward. And the "green energy" boondoggles is low-hanging fruit at this point, with Solyndras and the ilk playing the role Halliburton did in the last admininstration - a pointless money sink that funds were poured into for more idealogical than practical reasons.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
For most Fed Gov employees that is correct. But the contractors can be let go day one. That and if some agencies decide on Rifs those would also happen at a differant pace.

So the effect will not be one big bang like many think but a slow drop that picks up until October when the new budget year goes into affect.

Most contracts have termination clauses, and some amount of money is paid in advance. Government employees can be furloughed fast without any penalties.
Termination clauses yes - suspensions - no.

Also many companies use external workers; those can go out the door on the company's whim.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
To cut the debt we should stop protecting Saudi and other middle eastern oil barons on our dime and charge the accordingly if they want us to stay and insure they can keep their fiefdoms.

What in the world makes you think we are doing it to protect them? We are doing it to protect our vital national interests or specifically the lifeblood of our economy, oil. We could not replace the oil we lost from them if shit hits the fan over there and interrupts our supply so we use our .mil to ensure the oil keeps flowing. It really is that simple.
 

etrigan420

Golden Member
Oct 30, 2007
1,723
1
81
EDIT:

Deleted, not worth it.

Suffice it to say that I hope you lose your job CPA
 
Last edited:

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Good find. I'll see your biofuel and raise you another Iraq war with a side bet Halliburton thrown in. ;)

I'll raise BOTH of you the banks and allowing the uber-elite to violate existing black letter law on a daily basis without fear of punishment or even losing the profits from said illegal activity.
 

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
Seeing as average government pay is now more than the private sector, I say so what.


[Citation Needed]

Hope you are not using one of the BS ones that just matched similar titles without looking at job duties or requirments. That would be very dumb for someone to follow that without much thinking.
 

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
8,516
1,128
126
a family would cut a bit from cell phone bill and maybe not pay for cable if they had to cut 3% of their budget.

the .gov would rather stop feeding the baby and get more channels on the TV when they have to cut 3%.

Obama said something like this about the budget cuts and spending more than we take in: "family's and business do not live this way (meaning within their means) and government does not either." i cant tind the exact quote.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
That's what my manager tells me when business is struggling and they cannot give me a raise this year.

In a year when corporations are pulling in the biggest profits and have the most money sitting in their coffers since the era of the robber barons?
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,519
2
81
The problem with the sequester is that you can't look at it from the perspective of the whole budget. Congress is to fucking pussy to touch entitlements like SS (22% of Budget) and Medicare/Medicaid (23% of budget) that they will not let the automatic spending cuts affect those two groups.

Next, we have mandatory spending (13% of budget) and interest payments (6% of budget) that cannot be touched.

That's 64% of the budget that is not going to be touched.

All you have left is Discretionary spending (17% of budget) and the Defense Dept Budget (19% of budget). We are asking these two groups to find immediate cuts that equal about 7% of their budgets. I know that 7% doesn't sound like a large amount, but the DoD and other departments have been steadily cutting their budgets for the past 4 years. The DoD has already dropped their FY13 Budget by over 5% compared to FY12.
 
Last edited:

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
I responded in kind to his statement.

His statement was something like "since they make more than their private sector counterparts I don't care"...

You didn't refute anything he said nor did you even deny what he said was true, I don't see how going straight to "go fuck yourself" is responding in kind. Shrug, perhaps in the world of P&N it is.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
The problem with the sequester is that you can't look at it from the perspective of the whole budget. Congress is to fucking pussy to touch entitlements like SS (22% of Budget) and Medicare/Medicaid (23% of budget) that they will not let the automatic spending cuts affect those two groups.

Next, we have mandatory spending (13% of budget) and interest payments (6% of budget) that cannot be touched.

That's 64% of the budget that is not going to be touched.

All you have left is Discretionary spending (17% of budget) and the Defense Dept Budget (19% of budget). We are asking these two groups to find immediate cuts that equal about 7% of their budgets. I know that 7% doesn't sound like a large amount, but the DoD and other departments have been steadily cutting their budgets for the past 4 years. The DoD has already dropped their FY13 Budget by over 5% compared to FY12.

I saw a chart on the news that showed after/as wars were winding down that the defense department cuts averaged 34 to 43%. This is the norm. They should not be whining about the cuts to defense. It's the normal course of action.
 

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
The problem with the sequester is that you can't look at it from the perspective of the whole budget. Congress is to fucking pussy to touch entitlements like SS (22% of Budget) and Medicare/Medicaid (23% of budget) that they will not let the automatic spending cuts affect those two groups.

Next, we have mandatory spending (13% of budget) and interest payments (6% of budget) that cannot be touched.

That's 64% of the budget that is not going to be touched.

All you have left is Discretionary spending (17% of budget) and the Defense Dept Budget (19% of budget). We are asking these two groups to find immediate cuts that equal about 7% of their budgets. I know that 7% doesn't sound like a large amount, but the DoD and other departments have been steadily cutting their budgets for the past 4 years. The DoD has already dropped their FY13 Budget by over 5% compared to FY12.


Where do you get that?

DoD budget
2012 - $707.5 billion
2011 -$683.7 billion


800px-U.S._Defense_Spending_Trends.png


The 2009 U.S. military budget accounts for approximately 40% of global arms spending. The 2012 budget is 6–7 times larger than the $106 billion military budget of China, and is more than the next twenty largest military spenders combined.
 
Last edited:

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Where do you get that?

DoD budget
2012 - $707.5 billion
2011 -$683.7 billion


800px-U.S._Defense_Spending_Trends.png


The 2009 U.S. military budget accounts for approximately 40% of global arms spending. The 2012 budget is 6–7 times larger than the $106 billion military budget of China, and is more than the next twenty largest military spenders combined.

That's the Prime reason why we need to cut earned benefits such as S.S./Medicare which people have been paying in for during a lifetime of work. That way we can keep shoveling money to the Military Industrial Complex.