Rob Rogers by Rob Rogers

Rob Rogers

Comments (9) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Krazy Ig Katz

    Krazy Ig Katz said, over 3 years ago

    The bunny is suspiciously plump.

  2. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Being an accountant and an analyst and looking to always keep things as simple as possible, I can only hope someone can answer these questions (logically) for me.

    Since the sequester was implemented as a reduction in next years spending increase, how does that affect current spending?
    Since the core spending for next years budget is actually going to increase, how does that affect either current or base spending for next year?
    These aren’t trick questions. As I have understood it, in decades of professional practice, budget cuts means you take the core budget spending and reduce it. I know that government has their own Kabuki style accounting, I’ve had to work with it in the past. Compared to normal GAAP it is a work of fantasy. So I would greatly appreciate it if someone could answer the above questions so I can wrap my aging mind around this new concept.

  3. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, over 3 years ago

    This year’s Easter Egg Roll at the White House is funded by private donations and the sale of hardwood eggs.
    The eggs have The President’s and The First Lady’s stamped signature.
    If you buy the set you also get an egg signed by Bo.

  4. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, over 3 years ago

  5. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 3 years ago


    Your first question is (hopefully) relatively simple to answer. This sequester thing has been around since 2011. It became a possibility when the committee to reduce the deficits was formed. If the committee could not come to a compromise to reduce the deficit, then sequestration was to take affect. This happened last year, and the affects are now taking place in this fiscal year. Not only that, but because sequestration did not take affect until this calender year, and the calender year began some 5 months after the governmental accounting year began, the affective amount of the sequester cuts was not spread over an entire year, but over only 7 months, effectively almost doubling the percent of the sequester. Even as the head of a six person family household, I have to think ahead at least several months to make sure all of the family obligations are met. As an accountant I would think that you have to think even further ahead. So I must in all kindness wonder how you would not expect that the greatest single economic entity on this entire planet would not have to at the very least, do the same?

    Does this at least give you some kind of a reasonable answer to your first question? If so, then perhaps I could also help with your other questions as well. Very glad to see at least one thinking conservative member hear who actually asks reasonable questions. It is a far better method of discussion than some of our more extreme conservatives have adopted. And for that, you have the thanks of any thinking members of this site!!

  6. Rickapolis

    Rickapolis said, over 3 years ago

    The fat cats are now fat bunnies.

  7. dannysixpack

    dannysixpack said, over 3 years ago

    hope this helps. and I hope that someone can answer my congressional budget question as well.
    there are two lines in the budget that don’t get added in and no one looks at in the arithmetic. they are the lines for:


    2. corruption.

    no perhaps you can answer a question for me. How can our representatives who make about 150k per year, retire from congress with 10’s of millions of dollars in the bank?

  8. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    Thanks Robert. I spaced and clean forgot the “fiscal year” effect that the implementation had for 2013. I think I finally answered my own question about the “core budgeting issue.” It seems the constant controversy isn’t about the amounts involved but the nature of the cuts and who to blame them on, which of course depends on the partisan leaning of the article writer. My interest lies more in the area of what is being cut rather than who is responsible.

    What’s interesting to me is how difficult it is to find factual data that doesn’t have a partisan spin on it. I guess that’s to be expected. Washington is pretty much a political snake pit and the finger pointing has hit toxic levels.

    Robert, I guess being a Libertarian puts me in a strange political category but I’m truly not a republican. We totally disagree on the most fundamental tenets of their party, like abortion, gay marriage and the military as a start. Thanks again.

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    Robert, please. Do some more research:

    From a quick search an article from Wiki says:

    The term “budget sequestration” was first used to describe a section of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Act of 1985 (GRHDRA). The hard caps were abandoned and replaced with a PAYGO system by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, which was in effect until 2002. Sequestration was later included as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which resolved the debt-ceiling crisis; the bill set up a Congressional debt-reduction committee and included the sequestration as a disincentive to be activated only if Congress did not pass deficit reduction legislation. However, the committee did not come to agreement on any plan, activating the sequestration plan. The sequestration was to come into force on January 1, 2013 and was considered part of the fiscal cliff, but the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 delayed it until March 1 of that year.

    Each attempt at managing the budget has failed because no one is willing to cut spending. Not limit the increase but cut back the amount spent to reflect the amount collected.

  10. Refresh Comments.