The Case for Across-the-Board Spending Cuts

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1...63774.html

You know the cliché: America's fiscal condition might be grim, but lawmakers should avoid the "meat ax" of across-the-board spending cuts and instead use the "scalpel" of targeted reductions. The problem with this argument is that, given today's politics, it is nonsensical.

Targeted reductions would be welcome, but the current federal budget didn't drop from the sky. Every program in the budget—from defense to food stamps, agriculture, Medicare and beyond—is in place for a reason: It has advocates in Congress and a constituency in the country. These advocates won't sit idly by while their programs are targeted, whether by a scalpel or any other instrument. That is why targeted spending cuts have historically been both rare and small. And in a government as closely divided as today's, there is virtually no prospect for meaningful targeted spending cuts.




Big spending washington politicians are shooting their mouth off over such minimal cuts of funds. Thankfully they are being ignored even as they scream and shout and babble like toddlers.

Everywhere I've ever worked we were expected to do more with less.

I've never understood why telling the government to do the same always comes back with, "No! Think of X, Y, or Z?!?"

Drudge has the head-line "Pentagon lays off 800,000 civilians". Real story? Pentagon is going to force it's civilian workers (why not the military?) to work 4 days weeks with 4 day pay for the next 22 weeks.

Do more with less Pentagon.

Quote from Danman114 : Everywhere I've ever worked we were expected to do more with less. I've never understood why telling the government to do the same always comes back with, "No! Think of X, Y, or Z?!?" Drudge has the head-line "Pentagon lays off 800,000 civilians". Real story? Pentagon is going to force it's civilian workers (why not the military?) to work 4 days weeks with 4 day pay for the next 22 weeks. Do more with less Pentagon.

Government is more used to doing less with more. In many school districts, they teach fewer students but need more teachers to do it compared to 10 years ago.

arguing whether we need massive spending cuts or small, targeted ones is stupid -- we need spending increases.

Quote from thikthird : arguing whether we need massive spending cuts or small, targeted ones is stupid -- we need spending increases.

When faced with such an excellent analysis, how could anyone disagree?

Quote from andyfico : When faced with such an excellent analysis, how could anyone disagree?

Hey, just because the parents got a paycut, that doesnt mean junior cant get all the toys he wants. Buy him more toys and he'll pay them back later lol.

Cut the number of supercarrier battle groups in half, close overseas bases, and STOP working as the world policeman for FREE!

Who's ready for another recession? If you want spending cuts, then phase them in slowly and responsibly. But no, once again, John Boehner is playing poliltics with the U.S. economy. Everyone loses.

Can you imagine Barry's reaction to serious across the board cuts? We're looking at 44 billion in cuts and he told the American people the world was going to end, perhaps even the entire universe too. Rand Paul was right when he told Wolf Blitzer that this whole cutting business is being hijacked by emotions. This was Obama's idea and now, as usual, he plays the blame game.

Obama wanted the spending cuts before he didnt want the spending cuts.

This guy wants it both ways, then cries when either way happens. Brilliant!

Quote from MISHNAH : Obama wanted the spending cuts before he didnt want the spending cuts. This guy wants it both ways, then cries when either way happens. Brilliant!

He's crying because he figured out that his leftist base in 90% Democrat Washington DC might have to take a 5% cut.

Quote from Krazen1211 : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323482504578229892972863774.html You know the cliché: America's fiscal condition might be grim, but lawmakers should avoid the "meat ax" of across-the-board spending cuts and instead use the "scalpel" of targeted reductions. The problem with this argument is that, given today's politics, it is nonsensical. Targeted reductions would be welcome, but the current federal budget didn't drop from the sky. Every program in the budget—from defense to food stamps, agriculture, Medicare and beyond—is in place for a reason: It has advocates in Congress and a constituency in the country. These advocates won't sit idly by while their programs are targeted, whether by a scalpel or any other instrument. That is why targeted spending cuts have historically been both rare and small. And in a government as closely divided as today's, there is virtually no prospect for meaningful targeted spending cuts. Big spending washington politicians are shooting their mouth off over such minimal cuts of funds. Thankfully they are being ignored even as they scream and shout and babble like toddlers.

Um. You linked to an article behind a paywall? That page shows nothing but a message telling me to log in.

Quote from bridgeburner : Um. You linked to an article behind a paywall? That page shows nothing but a message telling me to log in.

Ah. Try googling the title and then clicking the first result. I find that WSJ sometimes paywalls and sometimes does not, its odd.

Quote from andyfico : Can you imagine Barry's reaction to serious across the board cuts? We're looking at 44 billion in cuts and he told the American people the world was going to end, perhaps even the entire universe too. Rand Paul was right when he told Wolf Blitzer that this whole cutting business is being hijacked by emotions. This was Obama's idea and now, as usual, he plays the blame game.

Add they aren't even REAL cuts....they are Washington-speak "cuts", ie reductions in the rate of increase...."cuts" for idiots i call them, like the book series. We are STILL increasing spending, just not as much as some previous arbitrary number that DC scum came up with in the past....yet they cry and mope as if the world is going to end....nauseating .