NY Times Trots Out “Austerity” Regarding Sequester


Nowhere in this article, which could have been written by the White House (but, really, this is just the way Liberals think) is it mentioned that Sequestration is simply a slight reduction in the growth of government

Austerity Kills Government Jobs as Cuts to Budgets Loom

I know, I know, you’re really, really, really broken up about a reduction in government jobs. The reductions are actually in state and local government, not Los Federales.

The federal government, the nation’s largest consumer and investor, is cutting back at a pace exceeded in the last half-century only by the military demobilizations after the Vietnam War and the cold war.

And the turn toward austerity is set to accelerate on Friday if the mandatory federal spending cuts known as sequestration start to take effect as scheduled. Those cuts would join an earlier round of deficit reduction measures passed in 2011 and the wind-down of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that already have reduced the federal government’s contribution to the nation’s gross domestic product by almost 7 percent in the last two years.

What the Times’ also fails to mention is that if that money isn’t in the hands of government it is in the hands of the private sector, which knows a hell of a lot more about responsible spending than government. Of course, that money is not flowing out in this horrendous Obama recovery. And, can you really call it “austerity” when there has been no actual reduction in government spending?

Total government spending continues to increase, but those broader figures include benefit programs like Social Security. Government purchases and investments expand the nation’s economy, just as private sector transactions do, while benefit programs move money from one group of people to another without directly expanding economic activity.

If government spending stimulates, why is the economy stuck in molasses almost 4 years after the Great Recession officially ended? One would think that the $800 billion plus in Stimulus would have done something.

Let’s repeat it for the low information voters: there are no cuts. None. Nothing. No federal agency is going to get less money next year than they did this year. They will simply receive slightly less than they were scheduled to see appropriated.

It’s like this: The Department of Regulating Light Bulb Use received $1 billion this fiscal year. They were scheduled to get $1.1 billion next year. Instead, they will only get $1.098 billion next year, which obviously means that all light bulb enforcement will cease and people will riot in the streets under incandescent bulbs.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Related Articles

3

Another Win for Illinois: Now Worst Debtor State

On the same day that it was reported that the checks sent to Illinois lottery winners had bounced, another more

15

Dept. of Justice HAD The Ferguson Robbery Tape BUT told Police to NOT Release It!

A conflict between the local police in riot plagued Ferguson, Missouri and the federal government has come to light over

14

Larry Summers Economic Memo To Obama: The Stimulus Was Never About Stimulus

The New Yorker has a lengthy piece on Barack Obama and his rise to power (which never seems to mention

No comments

Write a comment
No Comments Yet! You can be first to comment this post!

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*