On the day after the sequestration implemented from the federal government on March 2nd Darryl Parks from 700 WLW covered the events that transpired in the aftermath as government officials calculated that society might come to an end because of the cuts. Well, in his usual fashion Darryl brought some non-partisan, non emotional, non group affiliated analysis regarding the sequestration cuts to the light of reality. As many might be afraid of the rhetoric coming out of Washington Darryl put into the context the extent of the cuts in a fashion that everyone can understand. The ridiculous amounts that Darryl laid out in his broadcast, and that I break down below in written form are so small that they aren’t even worth discussing. Yet all the news broadcasts on television cried like infants for over three weeks along with virtually every politician, especially Barack Obama about the costs of these cuts to the social fabric of American society. So without further fanfare have a listen to Darryl’s broadcast as it was given on March 2nd at 9 AM in the morning.
Most people think that 44 billion sounds like a lot of money, but in regard to the sequestration cuts, it is only 1/80th of the total federal budget. The federal budget is in fact so large, and deliberately made complicated by the same politicians who have been crying wolf, that most Americans cannot even wrap their mind around the numbers. Nobody can envision a trillion dollars, and one billion is well out of touch from most people’s minds. Yet American spending is in a deficit trend of over a trillion dollars per year from an income stream where only 1.35 million Americans at the very top of the income bracket pay as much as the bottom 95%. In total roughly 130 million Americans pay taxes into the total federal budget minus some revenue generated from foreign trade and travel gathered in the form of sales taxes. So when it is learned that most of the federal yearly budget supplied to the government is provided by only 130 million Americans—while almost as many more pay no taxes off payroll or other direct measures, the situation becomes incredibly frustrating, and daunting. Like their counterparts in the government school system, federal bureaucrats make it a practice to deliberately deceive voters into protecting the empire of spending they have recklessly erected. For more information check out the links below:
How much the Top 1% pays in taxes:
Federal budget by the numbers from the Heritage Foundation:
Most people start to blank out when such large numbers are expressed so they cannot get their mind around such concepts. Looting politicians like Barack Obama know this, and have successfully hidden the extremity of these federal numbers behind relatable faces, like children, National Park employees, government janitorial staff and so on—so that tax payers will be inclined to vote in favor of more tax increases to help out their fellow Americans. The federal government essentially uses the same tactics that we have been fighting locally in the school levy debates—they clearly manipulate the numbers in hopes that nobody can wrap their mind around the truth. However, Darryl Parks did better than President Obama in showing the hypocrisy of the federal diatribes by putting into a context that everyone can understand the amount of the sequestration cuts that prove just how small they really are—and how much politicians in Washington and the doomsday press blew out of proportion the extent of the damage—which proves that none of them can be trusted.
Darryl did the hard math and discovered that it was much easier to understand the 44 billion in cuts coming from the sequestration reductions that went into effect on March 1st by proportionally breaking it down against something that virtually everyone can relate to, a McDonalds Big Mac extra value meal. Darryl took the known value of 1320 calories that are contained within a Big Mac extra value meal consisting of a Big Mac sandwich, a medium Coke and a large order of French fries that normally contain 87 individual fries within the container they come in and for sake of argument gave that value of 1320 an equal value to the federal budget. Now we know that 44 billion in cuts is only 1/80th of the total federal budget, so if we apply the same reduction to the Big Mac value meal, we discover that we will only lose 2 ½ French fries from our feast
Most people eating such a meal would not notice a 2 ½ fry reduction, and in the society at large, particularly the 130 million Americans who pay nearly all the federal tax, they won’t notice any reductions at the federal level. The only people who will notice the reductions are those who have built their careers in the flimsy existence of government and find themselves jobless in the sequestration cuts. It will be discovered that many of those reduced jobs were not necessary to begin with just as many of the local schools who have had to reduce their staffs have found that they can still operate with fewer employees as they work to meet their budgets. The impacted parties are those who work for government at wages that are too high for jobs that were created by government for government reasons.
Nobody in their right mind can argue that losing 2 ½ fries per Big Mac value meal will ever be noticed and will drive down the quality of the meal itself. Just like the sequestration cuts don’t even come close to bringing our federal government into the light of reality when it comes to fiscal spending of those poor 130 million tax payers who are covering the whole bill. Yet everyone who covered the sequestration in a negative way is guilty of openly misleading the American people with radical rhetoric that belongs in the basement of old hippie flower children engulfed in pot smoke as they watch reruns of Sesame Street and think themselves sophisticated contributors of society. In reality, much, much, much more needs to be cut from our extra value meals if we wish as a nation to lose any weight and take measures to truly get our budget under control. Taking away 2 ½ French fries out of 87 won’t do the job—and is not even worth the discussion which has transpired.