GOP budget cuts for 2011 could cost up to 1 mil jobs

[we vs us]

Just one more solid plank in the GOP's pro-growth, pro-jobs platform.

" . . . the cuts - a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 - would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs as fewer government workers travel and buy things. That's nearly 1 million jobs - possibly enough to tip the economy back into recession."

This brings up the question I can never seem to get answered:  why deficit reduction now?  Why not in 2012, when tax receipts are (knock wood) up?

[Townsend]

Just one more solid plank in the GOP's pro-growth, pro-jobs platform.

" . . . the cuts - a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 - would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs as fewer government workers travel and buy things. That's nearly 1 million jobs - possibly enough to tip the economy back into recession."

This brings up the question I can never seem to get answered:  why deficit reduction now?  Why not in 2012, when tax receipts are (knock wood) up?

It's what they think they promised.

If it passes and does that kind of damage, they'll pass the buck.

[Gaspar]

LOL!  I think I would have to see Lilly's "usual multipliers." After all he is the former director of campaign services for the Democratic National Committee.  I would assume that the "usual multipliers" are the same that were used to come up with the 2009 determination that the stimulus "created or saved 650,000 jobs" as unemployment skyrocketed.

using the usual multipliers, [Lilly] calculated that the cuts - a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 - would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs as fewer government workers travel and buy things. That's nearly 1 million jobs - possibly enough to tip the economy back into recession.

I also admit my bias, in that I believe 1 private sector job is worth 100 government jobs.  Private sector jobs produce.  Government produces nothing.  A government job is simply a financial liability on the people.  Not to say that government jobs don't serve an important purpose, some do.  However from a budgetary standpoint they are a negative on the balance sheet.

One single man milking cows, or building houses has more impact on the economy than a platoon of government workers paid twice as much with 5 times the benefits.  Perhaps we should teach them to milk cows.

[swake]

I also admit my bias, in that I believe 1 private sector job is worth 100 government jobs.  Private sector jobs produce.  Government produces nothing.  A government job is simply a financial liability on the people.  Not to say that government jobs don't serve an important purpose, some do.  However from a budgetary standpoint they are a negative on the balance sheet.

Yeah, all those teachers, cops weathermen, air traffic controllers and soldiers just suck. Can them all. Damn freeloaders.

[Gaspar]

Yeah, all those teachers, cops weathermen, air traffic controllers and soldiers just suck. Can them all. Damn freeloaders.

Actually since the cuts are focused, those are not the departments at risk.  Thanks for playing. Most of the cuts are program based. 

•   Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies -$30M
•   Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy -$899M
•   Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability -$49M
•   Nuclear Energy -$169M
•   Fossil Energy Research -$31M
•   Clean Coal Technology -$18M
•   Strategic Petroleum Reserve -$15M
•   Energy Information Administration -$34M
•   Office of Science -$1.1B
•   Power Marketing Administrations -$52M
•   Department of Treasury -$268M
•   Internal Revenue Service -$593M
•   Treasury Forfeiture Fund -$338M
•   GSA Federal Buildings Fund -$1.7B
•   ONDCP -$69M
•   International Trade Administration -$93M
•   Economic Development Assistance -$16M
•   Minority Business Development Agency -$2M
•   National Institute of Standards and Technology -$186M
•   NOAA -$336M
•   National Drug Intelligence Center -$11M
•   Law Enforcement Wireless Communications -$52M
•   US Marshals Service -$10M
•   FBI -$74M
•   State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance -$256M
•   Juvenile Justice -$2.3M
•   COPS -$600M
•   NASA -$379M
•   NSF -$139M
•   Legal Services Corporation -$75M
•   EPA -$1.6B
•   Food Safety and Inspection Services -$53M
•   Farm Service Agency -$201M
•   Agriculture Research -$246M
•   Natural Resource Conservation Service -$46M
•   Rural Development Programs -$237M
•   WIC -$758M
•   International Food Aid grants -$544M
•   FDA -$220M
•   Land and Water Conservation Fund -$348M
•   National Archives and Record Service -$20M
•   DOE Loan Guarantee Authority -$1.4B
•   EPA ENERGY STAR -$7.4M
•   EPA GHG Reporting Registry -$9M
•   USGS -$27M
•   EPA Cap and Trade Technical Assistance -$5M
•   EPA State and Local Air Quality Management -$25M
•   Fish and Wildlife Service -$72M
•   Smithsonian -$7.3M
•   National Park Service -$51M
•   Clean Water State Revolving Fund -$700M
•   Drinking Water State Revolving Fund -$250M
•   EPA Brownfields -$48M
•   Forest Service -$38M
•   National Endowment for the Arts -$6M
•   National Endowment for the Humanities -$6M
•   Job Training Programs -$2B
•   Community Health Centers -$1.3B
•   Maternal and Child Health Block Grants -$210M
•   Family Planning -$327M
•   Poison Control Centers -$27M
•   CDC -$755M
•   NIH -$1B
•   Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services -$96M
•   LIHEAP Contingency fund -$400M
•   Community Services Block Grant -$405M
•   High Speed Rail -$1B
•   FAA Next Gen -$234M
•   Amtrak -$224M
•   HUD Community Development Fund -$530M

[Conan71]

No time is ever going to be the best time to start thinning out government, we have to start at some point.  Instead of being concerned about legacies like how much unemployment dropped under a leader's watch, we need more altruism in government.

I'm tired of the ridiculous mantra that government is necessarily large and complicated.  There is absolutely no reason for it to be as large as it is other than we've created layer after layer of bureaucracy to oversee other bureaucracies which weren't effective enough, or ones which were created out of nothing more than patronage.

Belt tightening is inevitable.  Yes austerity is painful, but you eventually get past it.  Jobs and functions which are "essential" can be contracted back to the government thus creating opportunities for new businesses and private sector jobs.

Anyone notice the only people screaming about merging functions at the state level are department heads who are trying to protect their job?  What's particularly alarming is lobbyists who are chiming in about the dangers of government cuts.  Well of course they are. 

The government needs to be subject to the people, not the other way around.

[Cats Cats Cats]

Well this is just stupid

Family Planning -$327M
and
WIC -$758M

So you want to cut people getting birth control then cut the programs to pay for the kids they have and can't afford.  I am sure that $327M probably pays for itself in lower welfare costs.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services -$96M Then those people end up in Prison.  Getting somebody help and staying on their meds pays for itself.  Prison is expensive!

Should be +$327M for family planning - 758M WIC.  Where is the welfare welfare in all of this.

[Conan71]

I didn't see it spelled out in Gaspar's list with a quick read, but I did see the other day the Pentagon is requesting $42 bln less this year.  Good to see the military doing their part as well.

[Conan71]

Well this is just stupid

Family Planning -$327M
and
WIC -$758M

So you want to cut people getting birth control then cut the programs to pay for the kids they have and can't afford.  I am sure that $327M probably pays for itself in lower welfare costs.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services -$96M Then those people end up in Prison.  Getting somebody help and staying on their meds pays for itself.  Prison is expensive!

There's a lot of duplication through various agencies and budgets and you are also making the assumption that those cuts necessarily mean a reduction in benefits or that the benefits were useful in the first place.  You also fail to realize that $327 mm in family planning isn't all spent on birth control devices. 

The idea these people will all be turned out is nothing but hysterics.

For every $100mm budget, there's a good percentage of money being spent which does not directly benefit the people it's intended for.

[swake]

Actually since the cuts are focused, those are not the departments at risk.  Thanks for playing. Most of the cuts are program based. 

•   Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies -$30M
•   Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy -$899M
•   Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability -$49M
•   Nuclear Energy -$169M
•   Fossil Energy Research -$31M
•   Clean Coal Technology -$18M
•   Strategic Petroleum Reserve -$15M
•   Energy Information Administration -$34M
•   Office of Science -$1.1B
•   Power Marketing Administrations -$52M
•   Department of Treasury -$268M
•   Internal Revenue Service -$593M
•   Treasury Forfeiture Fund -$338M
•   GSA Federal Buildings Fund -$1.7B
•   ONDCP -$69M
•   International Trade Administration -$93M
•   Economic Development Assistance -$16M
•   Minority Business Development Agency -$2M
•   National Institute of Standards and Technology -$186M
•   NOAA -$336M
•   National Drug Intelligence Center -$11M
•   Law Enforcement Wireless Communications -$52M
•   US Marshals Service -$10M
•   FBI -$74M
•   State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance -$256M
•   Juvenile Justice -$2.3M
•   COPS -$600M
•   NASA -$379M
•   NSF -$139M
•   Legal Services Corporation -$75M
•   EPA -$1.6B
•   Food Safety and Inspection Services -$53M
•   Farm Service Agency -$201M
•   Agriculture Research -$246M
•   Natural Resource Conservation Service -$46M
•   Rural Development Programs -$237M
•   WIC -$758M
•   International Food Aid grants -$544M
•   FDA -$220M
•   Land and Water Conservation Fund -$348M
•   National Archives and Record Service -$20M
•   DOE Loan Guarantee Authority -$1.4B
•   EPA ENERGY STAR -$7.4M
•   EPA GHG Reporting Registry -$9M
•   USGS -$27M
•   EPA Cap and Trade Technical Assistance -$5M
•   EPA State and Local Air Quality Management -$25M
•   Fish and Wildlife Service -$72M
•   Smithsonian -$7.3M
•   National Park Service -$51M
•   Clean Water State Revolving Fund -$700M
•   Drinking Water State Revolving Fund -$250M
•   EPA Brownfields -$48M
•   Forest Service -$38M
•   National Endowment for the Arts -$6M
•   National Endowment for the Humanities -$6M
•   Job Training Programs -$2B
•   Community Health Centers -$1.3B
•   Maternal and Child Health Block Grants -$210M
•   Family Planning -$327M
•   Poison Control Centers -$27M
•   CDC -$755M
•   NIH -$1B
•   Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services -$96M
•   LIHEAP Contingency fund -$400M
•   Community Services Block Grant -$405M
•   High Speed Rail -$1B
•   FAA Next Gen -$234M
•   Amtrak -$224M
•   HUD Community Development Fund -$530M

I don't know what list you are reading, but there are cops, doctors, teachers all over that list. Not to mention scientists, doctors, infant services, heat for the poor, parks and safety inspectors of all kinds.

[Conan71]

I don't know what list you are reading, but there are cops, doctors, teachers all over that list. Not to mention scientists, doctors, infant services, heat for the poor, parks and safety inspectors of all kinds.

Really? Which infants or cops are affected by energy efficiency and renewable energy?  Which doctors are impacted by the power of marketing administration?

You see a bunch of street level public servants turned out by this, when in reality, there's a lot of mid to high level bureaucracy which eats up a fair share of that money before it ever hits the street.

Now let's see which party resorts to fear mongering.  Our government has become unsustainable.  That's why our debt is in the $14 trillion range and why we will still spend $700 bln more than what we will take in during FY '14.  Just because our government can keep printing and borrowing money it doesn't have, doesn't mean we should keep doing it.

[Cats Cats Cats]

There's a lot of duplication through various agencies and budgets and you are also making the assumption that those cuts necessarily mean a reduction in benefits or that the benefits were useful in the first place.  You also fail to realize that $327 mm in family planning isn't all spent on birth control devices. 

The idea these people will all be turned out is nothing but hysterics.

For every $100mm budget, there's a good percentage of money being spent which does not directly benefit the people it's intended for.

Well since I fail to realize.  What percentage of that 327 million would have been used for birth control devices?  

[nathanm]

I also admit my bias, in that I believe 1 private sector job is worth 100 government jobs.  Private sector jobs produce.  Government produces nothing.  A government job is simply a financial liability on the people.  Not to say that government jobs don't serve an important purpose, some do.  However from a budgetary standpoint they are a negative on the balance sheet.

Government workers do sometimes (often, in my experience) provide useful products and/or services. I wish Oklahoma's equivalent of Arkansas' Geographic Information Office could produce/collect half as much useful data used by half as many private companies, thus creating half as many increased efficiencies in said private companies.

And that's a nice list..kill off the basic research private companies won't touch and kick the poor and disadvantaged. Great plan!

[we vs us]

Not sure why government is too big, if gov employment is down over the last 50 years.

[Conan71]

And that's a nice list..kill off the basic research private companies won't touch and kick the poor and disadvantaged. Great plan!

Come on Nathan you are above cheap hyperbole.

It seems we've all chimed in with our usual biases and we can all come up with stories of government efficiency and inefficiency to fit our own paradigms and to suit our argument.  We are making great leaps at assuming these cuts all mean direct benefit cuts to people who really need benefits or cutting valuable services or valuable jobs.  In many cases, there's duplication between agencies which can be consolidated effectively and jobs which can be outsourced more efficiently than being done in house.

I've worked on contracts directly with local, state, and federal and with government contractors for the better part of 20 years.  I've dealt with the DoD, GSA, Park Service, EPA, USDA, etc. ad nauseum. In that time, I've observed some incredibly wasteful practices and worked with some people who are a disgrace to public service.  I've also worked with some truly dynamic people who care about their job and they bring a taxpayer's approach to their job, not simply someone sucking the teat.

Cuts won't and don't have to be catastrophic.  What's our alternative?  Keep printing money or borrowing it from countries who don't like the US?  Keep raising taxes on productivity which helps stifle economic growth?  At some point, we all need to get used to the idea of less reliance on the government in our day to day lives.