Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, the U.S. Should Repeal the Sequester

    Sequester is taking effect and hundreds of thousands of federal public/government employees are being furloughed. Twenty percent of their wages will be stricken from their paychecks due to sequestration. All this in the vain of austerity and saving money. Less going out to try and match what comes in. The trouble? The amount coming in is less and less because corporations and the top 1 percent are paying less and less in taxes due to loopholes no politician is doing anything about. Welcome to a government for, by, and of the 1 percent. This is just the very tip of the iceburg, wait till this is used to justify the elimination of entire agencies in government, the entirety of the federal civilian workforce, etc. Will it go away entirely? No. What will come in its place? Welcome private government ... Where profitable, private organizations will replace our public government, all to the deafening applause of the American public as they smile and clap for less government.

  • Yes, it should.

    In the interests of the growth of the economy (rather than a further decline), this would need to be repealed and re-evaluated. While I DO very firmly believe that the government needs a massive cutback in spending, the area of dispersal and the services and sectors effected by this iteration of e sequester were unhelpful and really only doing more harm than good. Realistically, the cutbacks need to start in the paychecks of the people voting, so it won't happen.

  • Yes, it should.

    In the interests of the growth of the economy (rather than a further decline), this would need to be repealed and re-evaluated. While I DO very firmly believe that the government needs a massive cutback in spending, the area of dispersal and the services and sectors effected by this iteration of e sequester were unhelpful and really only doing more harm than good. Realistically, the cutbacks need to start in the paychecks of the people voting, so it won't happen.

  • Why do you think it's there?

    The sequester should have started decades ago if that's what takes to get the U.S. Government to quit spending and drag itself out of debt. Eventually, that is -- and it needs to start now. Parents' jobs are to leave their children in a better state then they found them. How can they do that with over $200,000 of federal debt per minor? And the solution to this problem is NOT by denying children their trip to the White House. Try not paying for congress members' children to go to college. We average Americans did it ourselves; surely someone who truly deserves a huge break like that can too.

  • No the sequester should not be repealed, but Congress needs to end it by passing a budget.

    The sequester should not be repealed. It was put into place to force the Congress to pass a budget for the United Stated government. While it is painful for those effected by the process it also puts lots of pressure on the US Congress to get to work and address the issues of the deficit and balancing the budget.

  • No the sequester should not be repealed, but Congress needs to end it by passing a budget.

    The sequester should not be repealed. It was put into place to force the Congress to pass a budget for the United Stated government. While it it painful for those effected by the process it also puts lots of pressure on the US Congress to get to work and address the issues of the deficit and balancing the budget.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.