HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Obama Warns Looming Seque...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 11:35 AM

Obama Warns Looming Sequester Would Devastate Economy

Source: NBC NEWS

President Barack Obama used his bully pulpit Tuesday to warn of calamitous consequences for the U.S. economy should the automatic spending cuts known as the “sequester” go into effect next Friday.

The president warned that the automatic cuts, totaling about $85 billion over the course of this year, would prompt job losses, weakened national security and canceled government services – among other consequences.

“So these cuts are not smart, they are not fair, they will hurt our economy, they will add hundreds of thousands of Americans to the unemployment rolls,” Obama said in a statement at the White House. “This is not an abstraction; people will lose their jobs. The unemployment rate might tick up again.”

The speech featured no new, concrete proposal from the president detailing how he would prefer for Congress to replace the sequester. Democrats in Congress released a plan last week that called for $55 billion in new revenues from closing tax loopholes and deductions, and additional cuts by $27.5 billion to each the defense and discretionary spending budgets over the course of the next decade.

Read more: http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/19/17017721-obama-warns-looming-sequester-would-devastate-economy?lite

32 replies, 4490 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama Warns Looming Sequester Would Devastate Economy (Original post)
Purveyor Feb 2013 OP
Vattel Feb 2013 #1
denverbill Feb 2013 #2
Kelvin Mace Feb 2013 #6
denverbill Feb 2013 #9
Vattel Feb 2013 #24
denverbill Feb 2013 #25
Vattel Feb 2013 #28
Stonepounder Feb 2013 #4
DCBob Feb 2013 #8
Liberal_Stalwart71 Feb 2013 #10
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #18
John2 Feb 2013 #11
Stonepounder Feb 2013 #12
John2 Feb 2013 #14
Stonepounder Feb 2013 #15
southern_belle Feb 2013 #22
Vattel Feb 2013 #23
Katashi_itto Feb 2013 #3
Kelvin Mace Feb 2013 #5
customerserviceguy Feb 2013 #27
Berlum Feb 2013 #7
msongs Feb 2013 #13
bamacrat Feb 2013 #16
DCBob Feb 2013 #30
bamacrat Feb 2013 #32
Myrina Feb 2013 #17
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #19
Myrina Feb 2013 #20
davidthegnome Feb 2013 #21
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #26
jzodda Feb 2013 #29
bucolic_frolic Feb 2013 #31

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 11:43 AM

1. Obama proposed sequestration knowing the danger.

I hope his optimistic view that the cuts would not actually be made was warranted. Otherwise he is gonna look pretty bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vattel (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 11:50 AM

2. Republicans demanded budget cuts in return for raising the debt ceiling. This is their bag.

If they had simply raised the debt ceiling, like they have does dozens of times previously, the sequestration scenario would never have existed. Republicans could have also avoided sequestration by agreeing to a 50/50 mix of tax increases to spending cuts, a 'compromise'. They refused even a 20/80 mix of tax increases.

Blaming Obama is like blaming the hostage for going along with their kidnapper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to denverbill (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:04 PM

6. The administration (Obama and Reid)

Had the ability to end hostage taking. Instead, they lined all the hostages up and gave them back to the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:44 PM

9. So you are blaming the hostage negotiator for not negotiating a good deal with the gunman.

The hostage negotiator didn't cause the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to denverbill (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 05:41 PM

24. Sometimes hostage negotiators deserve blame for not doing a good job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vattel (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:00 PM

25. The hostage negotiator wouldn't have had a job to do if no hostages were taken.

You seriously think the hostage negotiator is more responsible for the fate of the hostages than the criminal?

I'm no more than 5 miles from the site of the Columbine massacre (and the Aurora theater massacre for that matter). The police response to Columbine was pretty widely criticized, but nobody in their right minds thinks the police deserve more blame for Columbine than the two killers.

And anyone who thinks that Obama's response to the Teabaggers' hostage-taking is the problem, not the Teabaggers holding the debt-ceiling hostage, is sadly (or conveniently) misplacing the blame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to denverbill (Reply #25)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:10 PM

28. Of course I think that the Republicans are more to blame than Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vattel (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:01 PM

4. Saying that 'Obama proposed sequestation' is like

parents proposing to pay a ransom to the people who are holding their child. Remember, the Republicans were at that point crazy enough to drive the country into default by refusing to raise the debt ceiling limit (for the first time in history). But I think people are getting wise to the Republican strategy of screw the middle-class and the poor just so the 1% gets richer.

And they are also getting wise to the Republican 'plan' to let the Democrats propose a solution and then just flatly state 'no, that plan is a total non-starter - try again', without the Republicans ever coming up with a plan of their own - other than 'shrink the government down to where we can throw it out with the bathwater' - get rid of SS, Medicare, Medicaid, public schools, the Post Office, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:15 PM

8. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:48 PM

10. There are people who will blame Obama no matter what he does. Thanks for being the voice of reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:53 PM

18. Indeed. There's a lot that stinks around here. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:13 PM

11. It is exactly what the Republicans

 

and media want people to do but they shouldn't go for it. The problem with the United States is this extremist Republican Party led mostly by certain males in the South. The sooner these racists are gotten rid of in Government the better the U.S. will be off. The persons needed to lose their jobs are the rightwingers in Congress. Putting the power to govern in deranged hands is a mistake, that people in those Red Districts will regrett. This is a divided nation. Something has to give and I think it has to be the Republican Party. Maybe we should go after the War criminals in the Republican Party. It should not be us this time but them. The Republican Party can kiss my behind!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:23 PM

12. Yes, that is a big part of the problem.

However, the Republicans (and the country) are suffering from the law of unintended consequences. The R's have managed to gerrymander themselves enough 'safe' seats that they don't have to worry about losing the House, at least for awhile. The problem is that in doing so, they have managed to make those seats Tea-Party seats and the voters in those districts are the most radical voters of the whole electorate. These congresscritters don't have to worry about losing their seat to a Democrat. Instead, they have to worry about a serious primary challenge if they aren't radical enough. So they have to more farther and farther to the right in order to keep their seats. They really don't give a damn about what the country wants or needs, they just need to be radical enough to keep their radical district happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:34 PM

14. The last Election

 

and who voted for whom speaks volumes. President Obama won the Northeast, Midwest and the Western part of this country. The only region he did not win the popular vote was in the South. That is where most of these extremists politicians come from. Why should those Politicians dictate Policies for the rest of this country? The President won among most ethnic groups except one. That is why I believe this is more about race than anything else. I don't know about some people, but I'm getting fed up with the racism from the Republican Party. I think it is about time we be upfront and call it what it is. That political Party is just intolerant. That is this country's problem. Before we can do anythingelse, we need to solve the problem of racism first. The Civil War didn't really settle the problem. Some people in this country think they are better than others based on skin color.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:39 PM

15. The Republican party is the party of angry old white men.

Hopefully, as these angry old white men stop voting, the Republican Party will be able to begin to regain its sanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 03:01 PM

22. +1000 thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 05:39 PM

23. I agree with you. The Republicans bear most of the responsibility here.

In my opinion, Obama's proposal was a bad idea, but it was the Republicans who created the crisis that led to the proposal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 11:53 AM

3. $85 billion of the 3.8 Trillion dollar Budget is around 2.8% of the Budget

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:02 PM

5. Didn't you know that when you made the deal?

As long as you keep playing their game you are going to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:19 PM

27. Agreed

The Rethugs figure they're in a win-win position with the sequester. They know there's more than enough fat in the military budget to cut it, and they get the domestic cuts as a bonus, if they do nothing. Of course, if they can force the President into cutting something else (on his own initiative) the folks who suffer from that cut can blame him for throwing them under the bus. The best game they play is divide and conquer.

I heard this story on the radio on the way home, and it doesn't seem like the President is keeping a poker face as we approach this thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:06 PM

7. Republicans have stated Repeatedly that they want FAIL

Now they damn well mean to bring American to its knees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:29 PM

13. approving legislation by willingly signing it into law has consequences nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:41 PM

16. Does he not have the power and obligation to avoid this?

Can the President not issue an executive order at least delaying this? May not be in his power, but if it is he needs to act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bamacrat (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:34 PM

30. Yes, I suspect he has plan B in his back pocket should there be no deal.

I suspect he can claim a threat to national security and block the legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #30)

Wed Feb 20, 2013, 10:25 AM

32. That's what I was thinking.

Kinda like defaulting on the debt, he has a Constitutional obligation to make sure the country does not falter. The right will paint it as dictatorial, but anyone with half a brain will realize he has no choice if Congress will not act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:53 PM

17. I call bullshit on the 'damages military readiness' crap ...

... as I stated in another thread, we have enough military shit stockpiled around the world that we could cease military funding indefinitely and still have enough to blow up the planet several times over.

We aren't even close to going back to the Valley Forge days, Mr. President, Sir, so please stop with the scare tactics.

What we won't have, at some point, is the money to pay the troops. Garage sale, anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #17)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:55 PM

19. Scare tactics is what will light a fire under the GOP.

 

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EastKYLiberal (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:58 PM

20. Except that it's BS and making all of the news-watching lemmings panic.

I don't think the average American has the first clue how much shit we have stockpiled, and POTUS speaking in these terms makes it sound like at midnight, on March 1, the barn door will be left open and all the ooga-booga terraists will come flooding into the US and kill us all in our sleep.

That's just not responsible Presidentin', in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 02:56 PM

21. It's all too damn big for me.

From my limited understanding, there will be cuts to military spending, education, what little infrastructure we have left. Jobs will be lost, people who received federal assistance will lose it? Just, the scale of such a thing, the overall impact, is rather mind boggling. Are we talking about yet another recession? Or something worse? My understanding of economics is rather vague.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidthegnome (Reply #21)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:04 PM

26. Me Thinks That All Of The Above Is Possible And Plausible

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:27 PM

29. Make sure ALL the cuts take place in RED states only

As Bush used to say over and over "elections have consequences."

So why make people who are not in agreement on how these cuts are to take place suffer for it? Let the tea party and their supporters suffer. Essentially then make the south and west PAY for their support of these extremists. Only when the cuts start to effect their people personally will they then start to realize the insanity of their positions.

Make them pay!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 09:16 PM

31. The Fed Buys $85 Billion a Month

injecting that into the banking system and the mortgage system.

So we're supposed to worry about $85 Billion a YEAR?

I still think it's a bit overblown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread