"The Fiscal Cliff"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have zero faith that this administration will do anything besides tax and spend.

Bush taxed, spent, and got us into a war. I say 2 out of 3 is progress.

Still talking about Bush - will it ever end.

How fast are we supposed to forget about going to war with the wrong country? Sorry but maybe he's a guy you want to forget but only a fool forgets his history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have zero faith that this administration will do anything besides tax and spend.

Bush taxed, spent, and got us into a war. I say 2 out of 3 is progress.

Still talking about Bush - will it ever end.

Your party is still talking about Reagan. You are so desperate for a respectable model of Republican Presidents that the GOP even created a hologram of him to speak at the convention. I guess they decided that an illusion might upstage Romney and so they canned it. But it shows your desperation and also your selective memory when it comes to your political past.

[Anonymous]

When are the 10% cuts supposed to happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When are the 10% cuts supposed to happen?

Sequestration will happen on the first of the new year. Right now, the lame duck Congress needs to figure out if they can come to an agreement with that dirty word, COMPROMISE, before then that will keep this from happening.

But the middle class need not worry. Nancy Pelosi said months ago that the Democrats had the stronger position. If the don't get what they want, e.g. the end of the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy, they'll wait until sequestration happens then they'll immediately introduce legislation that will begin new tax cuts for those making under $250K. The Republicans will not be able to stem off that bill. It's one thing for them to hold out on tax cut extensions for everyone. It is another thing for them to try to block a bill designed to give those making under $250K a tax cut right after sequestration. If they try to block the new legislation trying to hold out for tax cuts for everyone, they will suffer a lot more in the public polls and opinion and they could easily find themselves in a rout come mid-term elections in 2014. The Republicans are fast coming to a no-win situation if they don't actually compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are the 10% cuts supposed to happen?

Sequestration will happen on the first of the new year. Right now, the lame duck Congress needs to figure out if they can come to an agreement with that dirty word, COMPROMISE, before then that will keep this from happening.

But the middle class need not worry. Nancy Pelosi said months ago that the Democrats had the stronger position. If the don't get what they want, e.g. the end of the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy, they'll wait until sequestration happens then they'll immediately introduce legislation that will begin new tax cuts for those making under $250K. The Republicans will not be able to stem off that bill. It's one thing for them to hold out on tax cut extensions for everyone. It is another thing for them to try to block a bill designed to give those making under $250K a tax cut right after sequestration. If they try to block the new legislation trying to hold out for tax cuts for everyone, they will suffer a lot more in the public polls and opinion and they could easily find themselves in a rout come mid-term elections in 2014. The Republicans are fast coming to a no-win situation if they don't actually compromise.

So government workers will receive termination notices in January? Will it be a gradual phase out, buy out or immediate layoff?

[Anonymous]

Still talking about Bush - will it ever end.

No. It will take generations to undo the evil done by the dreaded Bush.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is it?

A nickname for a budget procedure called "sequestration." Congress resolved the debt ceiling debate by putting the federal budget on a course for automatic, across-the-board cuts to the entire federal budget. The super committee was supposed to come up with a plan that would make cuts in a more targeted fashion that would preserve priority areas, but they could not agree. So, starting on January 1 the federal government will be cut by just shy of 10% - across-the-board - unless Congress and the President can rescind the law and come to some other agreement.

Does this mean 10% cut for every agency?

Give or take, yes. It's not entirely clear yet. Probably will be less (like 8.2 or 9.4) but no one really knows exactly. As I tend to be pessimistic, I always plan for the worst so I am figuring on about 10.

But this doesn't apply to the ones that are self-funded??

Re self funding, probably depends on the exact mechanism but the legal view in my Department is that user fees (a type of "self funding") would be subject to sequestration. The agency would collect the fees are then a certain percentage would go immediately to Treasury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is it?

A nickname for a budget procedure called "sequestration." Congress resolved the debt ceiling debate by putting the federal budget on a course for automatic, across-the-board cuts to the entire federal budget. The super committee was supposed to come up with a plan that would make cuts in a more targeted fashion that would preserve priority areas, but they could not agree. So, starting on January 1 the federal government will be cut by just shy of 10% - across-the-board - unless Congress and the President can rescind the law and come to some other agreement.

Does this mean 10% cut for every agency?

Give or take, yes. It's not entirely clear yet. Probably will be less (like 8.2 or 9.4) but no one really knows exactly. As I tend to be pessimistic, I always plan for the worst so I am figuring on about 10.

But this doesn't apply to the ones that are self-funded??

Re self funding, probably depends on the exact mechanism but the legal view in my Department is that user fees (a type of "self funding") would be subject to sequestration. The agency would collect the fees are then a certain percentage would go immediately to Treasury.

Not if the law allows for the agency to keep all fees, right?

[Anonymous]

hope we go over. DC has been artificially shielded by the economic downturn. Time to bleed the pig.

All those people who complain about housing prices in DC being too high...well slash the disgusting MIC budget, gore the government spending, put the gov contractors out of business and DC housing prices will crater back down to a normal balance between price and income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:hope we go over. DC has been artificially shielded by the economic downturn. Time to bleed the pig.

All those people who complain about housing prices in DC being too high...well slash the disgusting MIC budget, gore the government spending, put the gov contractors out of business and DC housing prices will crater back down to a normal balance between price and income.

Uh, hate to point out the obvious but you are arguing that unemployment in our region is too low and therefore that is causing high housing prices.

So what does your republican self call a "normal unemployment rate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hope we go over. DC has been artificially shielded by the economic downturn. Time to bleed the pig.

All those people who complain about housing prices in DC being too high...well slash the disgusting MIC budget, gore the government spending, put the gov contractors out of business and DC housing prices will crater back down to a normal balance between price and income.

Uh, hate to point out the obvious but you are arguing that unemployment in our region is too low and therefore that is causing high housing prices.

So what does your republican self call a "normal unemployment rate?

The issue isn't DC unemployment being too low, the issue is too much of the DC/DMV economy is tangentially tied to government spending and is 'over priced'.

Cutting the government, military, and contractor workforce will reduce the inflated wages of those in those sectors in DC (too many) and also force more to leave the DC area to other parts of the country, thereby lowering local real-estate prices to a better price/income ratio.

That said, I have no issue when private employers like VW, Hyatt, Marriott, etc choose to base themselves in the area because of the educated work force. On the other hand, i fully welcome Lockheed, BAH, SAIC, GD, BAE, NG, Triple Canopy, AECOM, and tons of other gov contractors (military or not) as well as average gov employees being faced with reductions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are the 10% cuts supposed to happen?

Sequestration will happen on the first of the new year. Right now, the lame duck Congress needs to figure out if they can come to an agreement with that dirty word, COMPROMISE, before then that will keep this from happening.

But the middle class need not worry. Nancy Pelosi said months ago that the Democrats had the stronger position. If the don't get what they want, e.g. the end of the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy, they'll wait until sequestration happens then they'll immediately introduce legislation that will begin new tax cuts for those making under $250K. The Republicans will not be able to stem off that bill. It's one thing for them to hold out on tax cut extensions for everyone. It is another thing for them to try to block a bill designed to give those making under $250K a tax cut right after sequestration. If they try to block the new legislation trying to hold out for tax cuts for everyone, they will suffer a lot more in the public polls and opinion and they could easily find themselves in a rout come mid-term elections in 2014. The Republicans are fast coming to a no-win situation if they don't actually compromise.

So government workers will receive termination notices in January? Will it be a gradual phase out, buy out or immediate layoff?

I'd imagine that each agency will determine how to manage the cuts. At mine we have already reduced all admin costs as much as they can be reduced and they already offered a buyout, which almost no one took. The current plan is for furloughs, but I did the math and can't see how that works out so I am assuming RIFs are coming. We've been saving like mad for months since I don't have much tenure. Additionally, this RIF guide from OPM states that severance is possible and so is unemployment. You will also get an annual leave payout. (See http://fehb.opm.gov/rif/general/egrifben.asp) According to OPM, the agency has to give you 60 days notice so if a RIF was coming on January 1, you would know by now. (See also http://www.opm.gov/reduction_in_force/general/rifguide.asp)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have zero faith that this administration will do anything besides tax and spend.

Bush taxed, spent, and got us into a war. I say 2 out of 3 is progress.

Still talking about Bush - will it ever end.

Nope. You own 2001-2008 and all the problems that went along with it.

You really think McCain would be guiding us to 5% unemployment by now?

[Anonymous]

All of Congress are a but of idiots as demonstrated by their inability to do anything the past couple years but get in each others way. But something will be worked out on this so it's not as drastic as 10% across the board but there will be cuts --or nothing will be decided and we'll (hate this phrase) kick the can down the road-- by just giving themselves an extension.

And defense spending is too high...

[Anonymous]

If the economy is forcing the elimination of excess or duplicate jobs, won't that be good in the long run? Because people will be forced to update their skills so they can be more competitive in a global economy.