Upcoming Sequester

[SparrowHawk]

This sequestration, including where and how deep the cuts would go, is a product of Congress (heard of it?). I think there are a few more government functions more visible to the public than ATC at HHH.



Keeping that cake-eating banker freak out of the White House was payment enough for me actually.

I assume you're referring to Mitt Romney?

Do some homework Chock Jockey you're a very bright guy. Remember ALWAYS follow the money. Start with www.opensecrets.org and see just who funded whom in 2008 and 2012. In 2008, needing TARP to save their assets, the Bankster money flowed like water to Barack Obama. Fast forward to 2012 and those same donors couldn't wait to write checks to Romney.

even to a cynic like me the amount of money is staggering and this doesn't count the super pacs which were even worse and harder to track down. This is why a great many referred to the candidates as "Obamney". Go one step further and look who bank rolled Bush or any of the competition since 9/11 and you'll see an alarming amounts of money from the same sources going to the eventual winner.

As an example consider Obamacare. Who in their right mind desiring to lower costs to consumers would ignore some basic tort reform? I'll tell you who, the guy who got absolute gobs of money in 2008 and 2012 from the Trial Lawyers Association. Give you a hint it wasn't McCain or Romney.

 

[blue collar]

I love it that the 'liberty' guy want the govt to put limits on what you or I can sue for, when a doctor screws something up that adversely affects me. Like operating on the wrong knee, or leaving a rag inside my body and causing infection.

 

[SparrowHawk]

I love it that the 'liberty' guy want the govt to put limits on what you or I can sue for, when a doctor screws something up that adversely affects me. Like operating on the wrong knee, or leaving a rag inside my body and causing infection.

NEVER said I supported tort reform (Which I don't). I mentioned it as an example of how things work. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[autofixer]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/02/19/the-995-billion-sequester-cut-is-actually-a-110-billion-spending-increase/

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

People saying that this is a 2.5% cut are wrong. The sequester is a 2.5% cut of the total federal budget, however, there are large portions that were exempt from the cuts. That means that agencies like the FAA, that come under the "discretionary" spending face the full effect of the across the board cuts. The law also does not allow for the agencies to make strategic cuts. The FAA is forced to simply cut each fund by the 8.5% amount.

That means payroll. That means less controllers and less technicians to maintain the Radars, NAVAIDS, and communication facilities in ATCT's and other remote sites across the country. It also means increased risk. To mitigate that risk, the FAA has no choice but to close towers and eliminate shifts.

It will also lead to reduced traffic flow. As time goes by, the reduced technician work force will show. As NAVAIDS, communication, and radar sites have failures, they will not be able to be restored as quickly due to the furloughed technicians and elimination of overtime.

This is not a good way to do business. If the agencies were given a mandate to cut by 8.5% with a target date and flexibility to cut strategically, I think it could be done without causing so much inconvenience, pain, and economic impact to the traveling public.

This sequester is not the way to do this. When this idea was floated by the President and agreed to by congress, nobody ever though that it would actually go into effect because it so stupid.

But here we are.

There was a comprehensive study done on how this will effect the transportation system and the economy. I have linked it here:

http://secondtonone....sult-Report.pdf

 

[southwind]

The Republican House will fold like a cheap suit.

Tick Tock !

Yeah, probably. But they will simply kick the can down the road for a few months so that the mess will return during peak travel season.

You mean kinda like the BaRack administration is doing?
Theses words sound familiar....."I will cut the federal deficit in half, by the end of my 1st term!"

There are NO CUTS! It is a 2% reduction in the amount of increase to the base-line. All of this is just bluster and threats to keep the never ending public trough overflowing.

I've taken pay cuts in the past, so maybe it's time "MY" employees (federal employees) took a hit !

The reduction ($85 billion) is one month's worth of Quantitative Easing by the FED.

Time for BaRack and his posse to face reality !

 

[delldude]

People saying that this is a 2.5% cut are wrong. The sequester is a 2.5% cut of the total federal budget, however, there are large portions that were exempt from the cuts. That means that agencies like the FAA, that come under the "discretionary" spending face the full effect of the across the board cuts. The law also does not allow for the agencies to make strategic cuts. The FAA is forced to simply cut each fund by the 8.5% amount.

That means payroll. That means less controllers and less technicians to maintain the Radars, NAVAIDS, and communication facilities in ATCT's and other remote sites across the country. It also means increased risk. To mitigate that risk, the FAA has no choice but to close towers and eliminate shifts.

It will also lead to reduced traffic flow. As time goes by, the reduced technician work force will show. As NAVAIDS, communication, and radar sites have failures, they will not be able to be restored as quickly due to the furloughed technicians and elimination of overtime.

This is not a good way to do business. If the agencies were given a mandate to cut by 8.5% with a target date and flexibility to cut strategically, I think it could be done without causing so much inconvenience, pain, and economic impact to the traveling public.

This sequester is not the way to do this. When this idea was floated by the President and agreed to by congress, nobody ever though that it would actually go into effect because it so stupid.

But here we are.

There was a comprehensive study done on how this will effect the transportation system and the economy. I have linked it here:

http://secondtonone....sult-Report.pdf

Floated by the President? He said this was all the Republicans doing.

 

[Knotbuyinit]

People saying that this is a 2.5% cut are wrong. The sequester is a 2.5% cut of the total federal budget, however, there are large portions that were exempt from the cuts. That means that agencies like the FAA, that come under the "discretionary" spending face the full effect of the across the board cuts. The law also does not allow for the agencies to make strategic cuts. The FAA is forced to simply cut each fund by the 8.5% amount.

That means payroll. That means less controllers and less technicians to maintain the Radars, NAVAIDS, and communication facilities in ATCT's and other remote sites across the country. It also means increased risk. To mitigate that risk, the FAA has no choice but to close towers and eliminate shifts.

It will also lead to reduced traffic flow. As time goes by, the reduced technician work force will show. As NAVAIDS, communication, and radar sites have failures, they will not be able to be restored as quickly due to the furloughed technicians and elimination of overtime.

This is not a good way to do business. If the agencies were given a mandate to cut by 8.5% with a target date and flexibility to cut strategically, I think it could be done without causing so much inconvenience, pain, and economic impact to the traveling public.

This sequester is not the way to do this. When this idea was floated by the President and agreed to by congress, nobody ever though that it would actually go into effect because it so stupid.

But here we are.

There was a comprehensive study done on how this will effect the transportation system and the economy. I have linked it here:

http://secondtonone....sult-Report.pdf

Hold on there just a minute Glen, even with the sequester, the FAA will have more money in this year’s budget than last year’s. In real dollars, the cuts bring the FAA back to their 2008 funding levels and the level of domestic flights has dropped by 27% since 9/11. Why the hysteria over the sequester?

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Hold on there just a minute Glen, even with the sequester, the FAA will have more money in this year’s budget than last year’s. In real dollars, the cuts bring the FAA back to their 2008 funding levels and the level of domestic flights has dropped by 27% since 9/11. Why the hysteria over the sequester?

So going back to 2008 is good for you? We should be growing as a country, not shrinking. Decreasing our transportation system capacity is not good for business. We can all agree on that. From the report:

"Budget reductions to primarily impact current operations and functioning of today’s air transportation system, with a proportionate reduction across line-items (Operations, Facilities and Equipment, Research, Engineering and Development and Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)).

We estimate that such reductions would lead to an annual decrease of

1) 36.5 to 73 million in passenger enplanements, and

2) 1 – 2 billion lbs. of air freight.

 Five and 10 percent reductions in passenger enplanements and air freight-related activity would lead to net job losses of 55,000 to 109,000 jobs annually.

 1 and 2 percent reductions in aircraft manufacturing would lead to net job losses of 11,000 to 22,000 jobs annually.

 The forecasted losses in output to the U.S. economy are estimated to be between $9.2 and $18.4 billion, with $2.7 to $5.4 billion lost in personal earnings to workers, leading to 66,000 to 132,000 jobs lost annually.

 The forecasted loss in Federal and State tax revenue is estimated to be between $500 million and $1 billion annually."

http://secondtonone.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/FINAL-Econsult-Report.pdf

"A significant portion of the FAA’s non-operations budget authorization has been (and is expected to continue) supporting the development and continued roll-out implementation of a new, satellite-based air transportation control system. This initiative will transform the seriously outdated Air Traffic Control (ATC) and Air Transportation System (ATS) currently in use in the United States and eventually air traffic control systems throughout the world.

Dubbed the “Next Generation Air Transportation System” or simply “NextGen”, these programs, equipment, and facility improvement initiatives are already being implemented throughout the country. The substantial transformation of the U.S. air transportation system is expected by 2025. It is safe to say that NextGen is considered crucial for the future of air transportation and our nation’s economic growth; it is not merely a luxury.

NextGen is not a single program or project. Rather, it is a carefully-crafted series of improvements to system and aircraft equipment and technological upgrades to existing systems, combined with new operational procedures designed to make the overall air transportation system safer and more efficient. The framework for the new system has been determined; the steps necessary to build and implement it are being developed on an ongoing basis. Initial steps have been developed and are currently being implemented, and important NextGen system components are scheduled to be rolled out from now until 2018, with the ultimate full implementation planned for 2025.
NextGen will be the most significant improvement to the U.S. air transportation system since radar was introduced in the late 1950’s. It will fundamentally transform each of the three foundational elements of air traffic control: communications, navigation, and surveillance. New advances in digital communication satellite guidance systems will enhance safety, improve pilot and controller situational awareness and significantly increase overall air transportation efficiency."

 

[southwind]

Leave Quag alone, he needs something to take the eyes off the real problem...........BaRack !

 

[signals]

Some airports are changing and a cut is needed and overdo. If you had two different entries to the gates and now you will have one, for example, why should TSA be staffed by the same number of agents?

The real shock is that even with looming cuts, the TSA is still hiring. Go figure!

 

[signals]

Leave Quag alone, he needs something to take the eyes off the real problem...........BaRack !

He didn't pay attention to his own assessment:
So going back to 2008 is good for you? We should be growing as a country, not shrinking. Decreasing our transportation system capacity is not good for business.

 

[delldude]

So going back to 2008 is good for you? We should be growing as a country, not shrinking. Decreasing our transportation system capacity is not good for business. We can all agree on that.

Good point....maybe Obama stops the Fed handout party and get everyone back on the tax rolls we could grow. End the unemployment party and they'll find work and fix the immigration problem in one fell swoop.

How can this country grow with this president?

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Good point....maybe Obama stops the Fed handout party and get everyone back on the tax rolls we could grow. End the unemployment party and they'll find work and fix the immigration problem in one fell swoop.

How can this country grow with this president?

This is what you want to go back to?

Job losses ballooned in final quarter of 2008
by Heidi Shierholz with research assistance from Tobin Marcus
This morning the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the nation shed 524,000 jobs last month, capping 12 months of declining payroll employment. The BLS also revised its employment estimates for previous months downward by 154,000 jobs, showing that the U.S. economy lost nearly 2.6 million jobs since December 2007.
Just to keep up with the ever-expanding labor force, the economy would have needed to create 1.5 million jobs over the last 12 months. This means that the 2.6 million jobs lost leaves us over 4 million jobs short of what the economy required to provide employment for the American workforce.
Furthermore, job losses accelerated sharply over the course of the year, with an average of 216,000 jobs lost per month over the year but an average of 510,000 lost per month in the last three months (see Figure). The total loss of over 1.5 million jobs in the fourth quarter of 2008-a 1.1% drop in employment-is the largest quarterly loss as a percentage of employment since the first quarter of 1975, and is a sobering indicator of what lies ahead if swift intervention in the economy does not take place.

http://www.epi.org/p...uarter_of_2008/

 

[delldude]

This is what you want to go back to?



http://www.epi.org/p...uarter_of_2008/

Well dude they aren't going anywhere now....and its 2008 spending levels....duh.

Besides, Maxine Watters claims we're going to lose 170 million with this sequester...