|
24 hours from doomsday; Is your food storage up to snuff?
|
|
Topic Started: Mar 1 2013, 03:24 AM (1,107 Views)
|
|
Pat
|
Mar 2 2013, 09:21 AM
Post #51
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 31,086
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #200
- Joined:
- Apr 13, 2011
|
Really? The sky hasn't fallen around here.
|
|
|
| |
|
Brewster
|
Mar 2 2013, 09:27 AM
Post #52
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 32,226
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #105
- Joined:
- Jul 16, 2008
|
You expect the whole sky to crash down on day 1?
|
|
|
| |
|
Brewster
|
Mar 2 2013, 01:32 PM
Post #53
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 32,226
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #105
- Joined:
- Jul 16, 2008
|
- CNNMoney
-
Will you notice an immediate effect? Not likely.
For the most part, the ramifications would kick in over months, not several days or weeks.
"By [April], government agencies will execute reduced work schedules and the budget crunch will become more acute," Sean West, U.S. policy director for the Eurasia Group, explained in a research note. "The pain will pick up speed from there."
Of course, anyone directly affected will feel the cuts right away. But the general public's awareness may be delayed and uneven. Different cuts will create different domino effects, according to longtime budget expert Stan Collender.
For instance, a government worker facing a furlough may think twice about buying a new car, whereas a federal contractor getting less business from Uncle Sam may not make new hires. Summer travelers may be surprised to face reduced hours at national parks or increased delays at airports.
The exact timeline of how the so-called sequester will unfold is still unclear. And lawmakers may eventually agree to replace the cuts. But here's what we know now.
Friday, March 1 - Sequester goes into effect: The White House budget office will issue an official sequestration order that cancels $85 billion in spending authority for the seven months remaining in the fiscal year. It will also submit a report to Congress detailing the level of cuts each agency must make to its programs, projects and activities.
March 1 and beyond - Federal workers put on notice; grants and contracts curtailed: So far at least one federal agency -- the National Labor Relations Board -- has already issued a formal 30-day furlough notice to employees. The Department of Justice says it plans to do so by Friday.
And the bulk of federal agencies planning furloughs will follow suit sometime thereafter. The FAA, for instance, will formally give notice on Monday that it plans to close 168 contractor-staffed air traffic control towers on April 1, and another 21 towers by Sept. 30, industry officials told CNN. The towers affected would be at small- and medium-sized airports that handle 5.8% of all commercial airline traffic.
Agencies will also cut back on issuing new contracts and reduce federal grants to everything from schools to airports to states.
March 26 and on - Furloughs take effect: Federal workers subject to furloughs will start working fewer days. That may be when the public first notices delays in federal services -- from making decisions about disability benefits to processing visas to providing airport security -- as well cutbacks in the hours of national parks.
When furloughed, employees are prohibited from working for a set number of days for which they will not be paid. The furloughs will vary from agency to agency.
The Pentagon, for instance, has said workers would be furloughed for one day a week up to 22 weeks starting in April. But the Department of Housing and Urban Development is planning on furloughs of just seven days: May 10, May 24, June 14, July 5, July 22, Aug. 16 and Aug. 30, according to a document obtained by CNNMoney. HUD offices nationwide would be closed on those seven days. And the IRS won't start furloughs until summer.
March 27 - Funding for the government expires: Congress must pass a new bill setting funding levels for the rest of fiscal year 2013, which ends Sept. 30. If they don't, the government would shut down all but essential services. This is one legislative vehicle that could contain a sequester fix.
April and May - Budget negotiations: If lawmakers haven't agreed to a sequester fix by this point, they may try to do so during their annual budget negotiations for the next fiscal year.
Mid-May to August - Debt ceiling negotiations: Congress will need to raise the country's debt limit. This could provide another legislative vehicle for a sequester fix, if one hasn't been put in place already.
August and September - Back to school, but not for some: Teachers and school staff affected by education-related cuts may be laid off for the 2013-14 school year.
Still unknown - Smaller unemployment checks: Everyone collecting federal extended unemployment benefits will see their checks cut by 9.4% retroactive to March 1. Just when they would start seeing smaller checks depends on how quickly their state unemployment office makes the change, which will vary from state to state. But chances are good many collecting benefits would see smaller checks sometime in March.
By Dec. 31 - Fewer jobs created: The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the economy would produce 750,000 fewer full-time jobs as a result of the forced spending cuts if they remain in effect for the whole calendar year.
|
|
|
| |
|
Thumper
|
Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
Post #54
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 29,881
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #77
- Joined:
- Jun 10, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:27 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 03:09 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:00 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:51 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 02:37 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:23 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 01:52 AM
- Banandangees
- Mar 2 2013, 01:50 AM
I think ending one's consideration on the source rather than the content is jus an easy out.
Why would I want to argue what is only someones biased opinion, when I can't even know who that person is or where they are coming from politically?
You too are missing the point.
No, Pat. I get his point. It is to constantly post anti-Obama op-eds and blogs, which can't be debunked because they are nothing but opinion. If he wants to encourage discussion, he should post something factual, not just someone's biased opinion. Facts to back up those opinions would be helpful.
Agree Neal,a case in point being despite the president's dire warning, the sky did not fall on his this morning. But he has now kicked that forecast down the road too, claiming sometime in the future we will be doomed.
A mild exaggeration, Pat? He hasn't said anything of the sort. What he has said is that it won't be the well -off who are hurt by sequestration, it will be the poor and middle class, and the economy will most likely suffer as well. I agree that the administration has been hyping the whole thing, but reps are equally at fault when it comes to over-hyping something. Witness the gun nuts argument that the government is coming to take away all of our guns.
Well of course I exaggerate at time. It's a weakness like pecan pie, something I can't kick. I think the cuts will be absorbed, people will learn to adjust. And that will be that. We do need to do something about entitlements, but nobody in Washington has balls to deal with the big issues.
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country. I saw General Odierno on Morning Joe this morning talking about the cuts to the military. I'm all for cuts to the military but here's some of what he said would happen to the Army alone. Helicopter pilots will be restricted to fewer hours of training, resulting in a shortage of qualified helo pilots. weapons replacement will be delayed. Training of combat troops will slow. Maintenance of equipment will be delayed and some other things I can't remember. Many government employees will be furloughed one day a week. That will result in a 20% pay cut. I would hate to have set myself up to live according to my means and then have to take a 20% cut in pay. Whether the number of layoffs will be as high as predicted, I don't know, but it will probably hurt the businesses that depend on those earners. I don't think we yet know what the results will be. The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means.
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:38 AM
Post #55
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
- Thumper
- Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
- Quote:
-
- Quote:
-
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country........
The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means.
Sooner or later the people are going to have to adjust. The president, both parties, military experts, social experts and business experts are going to forced to put their heads together and make as sensible cuts as possible. No doubt there will be shared adjustment, shared pain. But the longer we wait, the greater the adjustment, the greater the pain..... unless we just continue kicking the can down the road and pass it on to our children and grandchildren while we retain some comforts for ourselves.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:42 AM
Post #56
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Banandangees
- Mar 3 2013, 12:38 AM
- Thumper
- Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
- Quote:
-
- Quote:
-
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country........
The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means.
Sooner or later the people are going to have to adjust. The president, both parties, military experts, social experts and business experts are going to forced to put their heads together and make as sensible cuts as possible. No doubt there will be shared adjustment, shared pain. But the longer we wait, the greater the adjustment, the greater the pain..... unless we just continue kicking the can down the road and pass it on to our children and grandchildren while we retain some comforts for ourselves. So long as there is no new revenue in a deal, I don't think there will be any more cuts.
|
|
|
| |
|
Thumper
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:43 AM
Post #57
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 29,881
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #77
- Joined:
- Jun 10, 2008
|
Probably right.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pat
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:46 AM
Post #58
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 31,086
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #200
- Joined:
- Apr 13, 2011
|
- Thumper
- Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:27 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 03:09 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:00 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:51 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 02:37 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:23 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 01:52 AM
- Banandangees
- Mar 2 2013, 01:50 AM
I think ending one's consideration on the source rather than the content is jus an easy out.
Why would I want to argue what is only someones biased opinion, when I can't even know who that person is or where they are coming from politically?
You too are missing the point.
No, Pat. I get his point. It is to constantly post anti-Obama op-eds and blogs, which can't be debunked because they are nothing but opinion. If he wants to encourage discussion, he should post something factual, not just someone's biased opinion. Facts to back up those opinions would be helpful.
Agree Neal,a case in point being despite the president's dire warning, the sky did not fall on his this morning. But he has now kicked that forecast down the road too, claiming sometime in the future we will be doomed.
A mild exaggeration, Pat? He hasn't said anything of the sort. What he has said is that it won't be the well -off who are hurt by sequestration, it will be the poor and middle class, and the economy will most likely suffer as well. I agree that the administration has been hyping the whole thing, but reps are equally at fault when it comes to over-hyping something. Witness the gun nuts argument that the government is coming to take away all of our guns.
Well of course I exaggerate at time. It's a weakness like pecan pie, something I can't kick. I think the cuts will be absorbed, people will learn to adjust. And that will be that. We do need to do something about entitlements, but nobody in Washington has balls to deal with the big issues.
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country. I saw General Odierno on Morning Joe this morning talking about the cuts to the military. I'm all for cuts to the military but here's some of what he said would happen to the Army alone. Helicopter pilots will be restricted to fewer hours of training, resulting in a shortage of qualified helo pilots. weapons replacement will be delayed. Training of combat troops will slow. Maintenance of equipment will be delayed and some other things I can't remember. Many government employees will be furloughed one day a week. That will result in a 20% pay cut. I would hate to have set myself up to live according to my means and then have to take a 20% cut in pay. Whether the number of layoffs will be as high as predicted, I don't know, but it will probably hurt the businesses that depend on those earners. I don't think we yet know what the results will be.
The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means. You have drank the Brew. Now use some logic and common sense. The entire cut is $85 billion this year. We damn near spent that much bailing out the states affected by hurricane Sandy, and there was not great outcry that this was breaking the piggy bank. And if you review the line items of each program being affected like I did this morning, here is my opinion. If a manager can't handle the little being subtracted from their budget, then they need to be fired and a new manager hired. Most government departments waste more than that around the water cooler.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:52 AM
Post #59
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Pat
- Mar 3 2013, 12:46 AM
- Thumper
- Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:27 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 03:09 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:00 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:51 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 02:37 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:23 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 01:52 AM
- Banandangees
- Mar 2 2013, 01:50 AM
I think ending one's consideration on the source rather than the content is jus an easy out.
Why would I want to argue what is only someones biased opinion, when I can't even know who that person is or where they are coming from politically?
You too are missing the point.
No, Pat. I get his point. It is to constantly post anti-Obama op-eds and blogs, which can't be debunked because they are nothing but opinion. If he wants to encourage discussion, he should post something factual, not just someone's biased opinion. Facts to back up those opinions would be helpful.
Agree Neal,a case in point being despite the president's dire warning, the sky did not fall on his this morning. But he has now kicked that forecast down the road too, claiming sometime in the future we will be doomed.
A mild exaggeration, Pat? He hasn't said anything of the sort. What he has said is that it won't be the well -off who are hurt by sequestration, it will be the poor and middle class, and the economy will most likely suffer as well. I agree that the administration has been hyping the whole thing, but reps are equally at fault when it comes to over-hyping something. Witness the gun nuts argument that the government is coming to take away all of our guns.
Well of course I exaggerate at time. It's a weakness like pecan pie, something I can't kick. I think the cuts will be absorbed, people will learn to adjust. And that will be that. We do need to do something about entitlements, but nobody in Washington has balls to deal with the big issues.
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country. I saw General Odierno on Morning Joe this morning talking about the cuts to the military. I'm all for cuts to the military but here's some of what he said would happen to the Army alone. Helicopter pilots will be restricted to fewer hours of training, resulting in a shortage of qualified helo pilots. weapons replacement will be delayed. Training of combat troops will slow. Maintenance of equipment will be delayed and some other things I can't remember. Many government employees will be furloughed one day a week. That will result in a 20% pay cut. I would hate to have set myself up to live according to my means and then have to take a 20% cut in pay. Whether the number of layoffs will be as high as predicted, I don't know, but it will probably hurt the businesses that depend on those earners. I don't think we yet know what the results will be.
The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means.
You have drank the  Brew. Now use some logic and common sense. The entire cut is $85 billion this year. We damn near spent that much bailing out the states affected by hurricane Sandy, and there was not great outcry that this was breaking the piggy bank. And if you review the line items of each program being affected like I did this morning, here is my opinion. If a manager can't handle the little being subtracted from their budget, then they need to be fired and a new manager hired. Most government departments waste more than that around the water cooler. I accept that as your opinion, but you haven't offered anything other than opinion to support what you say. You aren't in the position to have to make those decisions and have no knowledge of the complexity of various government programs. As I posted the other day, the 85 billion is coming entirely from discretionary spending, which will only hurt the poor and middle class and do nothing to upset the gravy train enjoyed by the wealthy. In addition, it's a minute percentage of the total problem.
|
|
|
| |
|
Pat
|
Mar 3 2013, 12:56 AM
Post #60
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 31,086
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #200
- Joined:
- Apr 13, 2011
|
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 3 2013, 12:52 AM
- Pat
- Mar 3 2013, 12:46 AM
- Thumper
- Mar 2 2013, 01:44 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:27 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 03:09 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 03:00 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:51 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 02:37 AM
- Pat
- Mar 2 2013, 02:23 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Mar 2 2013, 01:52 AM
- Banandangees
- Mar 2 2013, 01:50 AM
I think ending one's consideration on the source rather than the content is jus an easy out.
Why would I want to argue what is only someones biased opinion, when I can't even know who that person is or where they are coming from politically?
You too are missing the point.
No, Pat. I get his point. It is to constantly post anti-Obama op-eds and blogs, which can't be debunked because they are nothing but opinion. If he wants to encourage discussion, he should post something factual, not just someone's biased opinion. Facts to back up those opinions would be helpful.
Agree Neal,a case in point being despite the president's dire warning, the sky did not fall on his this morning. But he has now kicked that forecast down the road too, claiming sometime in the future we will be doomed.
A mild exaggeration, Pat? He hasn't said anything of the sort. What he has said is that it won't be the well -off who are hurt by sequestration, it will be the poor and middle class, and the economy will most likely suffer as well. I agree that the administration has been hyping the whole thing, but reps are equally at fault when it comes to over-hyping something. Witness the gun nuts argument that the government is coming to take away all of our guns.
Well of course I exaggerate at time. It's a weakness like pecan pie, something I can't kick. I think the cuts will be absorbed, people will learn to adjust. And that will be that. We do need to do something about entitlements, but nobody in Washington has balls to deal with the big issues.
I agree that if the cuts are left in place, we will have no alternative but to adjust. The question is whether the cuts will have been a good thing or a bad thing for the country. I saw General Odierno on Morning Joe this morning talking about the cuts to the military. I'm all for cuts to the military but here's some of what he said would happen to the Army alone. Helicopter pilots will be restricted to fewer hours of training, resulting in a shortage of qualified helo pilots. weapons replacement will be delayed. Training of combat troops will slow. Maintenance of equipment will be delayed and some other things I can't remember. Many government employees will be furloughed one day a week. That will result in a 20% pay cut. I would hate to have set myself up to live according to my means and then have to take a 20% cut in pay. Whether the number of layoffs will be as high as predicted, I don't know, but it will probably hurt the businesses that depend on those earners. I don't think we yet know what the results will be.
The trick is don't set yourself up to live "within" your means. Live "below" your means.
You have drank the  Brew. Now use some logic and common sense. The entire cut is $85 billion this year. We damn near spent that much bailing out the states affected by hurricane Sandy, and there was not great outcry that this was breaking the piggy bank. And if you review the line items of each program being affected like I did this morning, here is my opinion. If a manager can't handle the little being subtracted from their budget, then they need to be fired and a new manager hired. Most government departments waste more than that around the water cooler.
I accept that as your opinion, but you haven't offered anything other than opinion to support what you say. You aren't in the position to have to make those decisions and have no knowledge of the complexity of various government programs. As I posted the other day, the 85 billion is coming entirely from discretionary spending, which will only hurt the poor and middle class and do nothing to upset the gravy train enjoyed by the wealthy. In addition, it's a minute percentage of the total problem. True, but I have overseen a reduction in revenue in some business ventures, of as much as 40% and we did just fine. Tightened the belt, made adjustments and went on without missing a beat. Why government can't be more limber and quick on it's feet is a matter of concern to me. So like many of my posts, I draw on nearly 73 years of living and 45 years of business experiences. Yea I know, that is nothing.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|