I don’t know about you, but . . .

Posted by Marvin on February 20, 2013 at 6:58 pm

Each year when our accountant completes our tax returns we necessarily review our family finances. If the returns result in additional payment to the government, we look to trim our expenditures. If there’s a refund in our future–well, we’re still waiting for that to happen.

A logical response might be to increase withholding. Been there. Done that.

Alternatively, shaving expenses and squirreling away a few bucks to deal with the next IRS Day is worthy of consideration. Perhaps.

Cutting back is never easy. Nobody wants to do that. But one solution that would never occur to us would be an across-the-board remedy. We’d likely hear from our bank about a somewhat lighter mortgage payment. Toyota would gently remind us that our Prius’ lease payment was a tad short of the mark. Worst case scenario–LIPA shuts off our electricity.

If families wouldn’t consider trimming the household budget by applying a reduction of equal percentage or amount to each fixed expense, why would anyone anyone expect the federal government to consider such a solution to a budget shortage?

Republicans rant, Obama proposed and demanded the sequester. You and I do not need to revisit the recent past. They are full of crap and they know it. Paul Ryan did back flips to celebrate getting the sequester into theBudget Control Act. Of course last night he looked straight into the camera and denied any association with the hair-brained solution to the nation’s economic problem. It was frighties’ condition for not having America default on its obligations.

Having committed to a pledge of no tax increase for any person or corporation under any circumstances they have managed to paint themselves into a corner. And just in case they thought they might climb a wall or invent another way out of that corner, their compatriot Tea Party neanderthals are holding potentially reasonable GOP (ahem!) electeds from appearing reasonable.

How many times can they repeat, Obama’s sequester, without accepting any responsibility?Both parties thought sequestration was an okay temporary response because there would be no way that it would ever come to be. Sillyheads!

Unless the term compromise can be reinstated into Republican speak, it appears lots of people are going to take a huge hit. And then the TV heads will spend weeks asking politicians how could they have allowed this to happen. The talkers and the talkees will not be among those directly experiencing the outcome. We will.

Boehner will shed a tear of course, We’re down to just (fill in the blank) days before brutal sequestration cuts kick in, undermining the economy, the military, and public needs.

President Obama has said repeatedly that he’s open to compromise. Republicans respond, We aren’t. Boehner felt the need to make his case in the Wall Street Journal It’s all Obama’s fault, by John Boehner

Before reading it, I advise you down a few antacids. In 2011, President Obama accepted more than $1.2 trillion in spending cuts with no revenue. Boehner said that was inadequate. He agreed to a sequester to allow time for further talks. Obama pushed for a sequester that was 50% revenue, 50% cuts. Boehner turned him down. But with disaster looming, Boehner caved and agreed to 50% defense cuts, 50% non-defense domestic cuts.

With the countdown to sequestration approaching zero, Congress need not make the cuts. There are options. Any one of which would save our country a great deal of trouble. I know the solution. Alice and I face the problem every year. Just the same as do you and most Americans.

Boehner’s mendacity is striking–even after following his gyrations for the past several years. HisWSJ nonsense is intended to deceive us.

But you and I know better.

Be Sociable, Share!