Sequester

      Through the lens of CNN, the sequester is a 1.2 trillion government spendings cut spaced over a period of 10 years. These cuts would be focused evenly between defense spendings and domestic discretionary spendings. The origin of these across-the-boards cuts could be argued as to be a result from the increasing US debt which is upwards of $16 trillion, especially spiking after the 2007 recession. More recently, the standoff between the Obama administration and the Republicans in Congress in 2011 over the US debt ceiling has them agreeing to cut $1 trillion through a debt ceiling law and the sequester, although there was hope that a "super committee" could find a less drastic method of reducing government spendings. Some conservative groups like FreedomWorks support the measure, although others think it is "legislative madness". The sequester's date of March 1st is due to it being pushed back from New Years Day as the government did not want to have old Bush tax cuts expiring at the same time as the sequester, perhaps reversing a still-struggling economy. $46 billion will be cut in 2013.
    ABC News includes the fact that Social Security checks, Veterans Administrations programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Pell grants, food stamps, and CHIPS will not be affected by the 9% cuts. Some governments officials maintain that programs have some "flexibilty" in which they can avoid the worst of cuts, while others purport that the "rigid nature" of the sequester does not allow too much maneuvering. Most of the cuts will be dealt with through government-worker furloughs, although there will be advance warning to these workers. Before the required legal signing in of the sequester, the government sought ways to prevent it. One thought was to give agencies more authority so that they could rearrange their own money and concentrate funds on the essential programs. The sequester has already been delayed once; it is possible that it can be legally postponed again.
    Lastly, according to the Washington post, the sequester is part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 and part of the debt ceiling deal. The sequester was a last-minute punishment of sorts as the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, or Supercommittee, could not reach a compromise to cut $1.5 trillion over 10 years. The fiscal cliff of New Years Day was averted partially because the sequester was delayed to March 1. Despite heavy reductions, no programs will be cut altogether. One example of cuts can be seen in the shuttering of 128 national wildlife refuges of 561. Obama has suggested having a new package of tax increases than the sequester in 2013. Pretty much every group and organization does not want to see the sequester go through.

Manifesto Beta Version

I feel that government is created as a system to manage the affairs of the people, especially those it directly governs. Therefore, the government should be involved to some degree with the economy as money is a very human and social thing that is controlled by our desires. Social programs, a - again - very human affair, should be aided by (and in some cases controlled) by the government. This is because the government is taking some of the money (taxes - which I approve of, more on that later) and money ought to be used to improve the nation the government runs, including aiding organizations which seek to help people in various situations. This has pros and cons however; one negative aspect is that dependence and mooching can occur, producing or encouraging a populace of shiftless individuals who take advantage of programs they are not in need of. Yet, because of the inevitability of the class wealth distinctions characteristics of a capitalist system, there will be disadvantaged individuals who would benefit from these programs and could then contribute back to society (the ultimate purpose of instating social programs by the government) with their increased confidence, skills and understanding. Overall, social programs, while essentially a good moral idea, will always feed a certain populace that will not give back to society. Yet, the programs should exist, regardless of the negative factors, as no programs would anger the a majority of the population and an angry people is not a good thing for a government.

Economics Research Project Spring 2013

 To Presentation