<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cliff Notes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/</link>
	<description>Facts, Thoughts, and Commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 02:00:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: wendy beck</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/#comment-258065</link>
		<dc:creator>wendy beck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:12:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6008#comment-258065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This seems to be the MO of Republicans. They create a crisis, blame it on others and then profit by it. I see it everywhere -- seems to be a strategy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This seems to be the MO of Republicans. They create a crisis, blame it on others and then profit by it. I see it everywhere &#8212; seems to be a strategy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jared Bernstein</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/#comment-257844</link>
		<dc:creator>Jared Bernstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6008#comment-257844</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very interesting--thanks for adding that nuance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting&#8211;thanks for adding that nuance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris G</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/#comment-257787</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 16:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6008#comment-257787</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt; Goozner stresses that, in fact, contractors have been cutting employment for years:  &quot;…while spending on major weapons systems only recently began its post-Iraq and Afghanistan decline, employment at the largest firms in the [defense] industry began falling in 2009 or before. That is at least three years before the current round of budget cuts dictated by the Budget Control Act and long before concern about the impact of sequestration.&quot;

Speaking as someone who works for a small defense contractor, the timeframe is shorter for smallish firms - a few hundred employees and below.  Typical programs run a few years - two or three.  Cuts usually affect work which would replace current programs when they expire.  (It&#039;s pretty unusual for an existing program to get terminated.)  If new work doesn&#039;t come in as anticipated then you can usually see &#039;the cliff&#039; fairly far in advance - six months to a year.  That said, it&#039;s pretty tough to forecast more than a year in advance.  Take anecotes for what they&#039;re worth but I was watching my own cliff approaching for nearly a year and then just a couple months before &#039;dropoff&#039; a new program came in which kept me going for six months and things stabilized - for awhile - during that period.  Long term forecasting is difficult.  (Not a deep statement but a truism worth repeating.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Goozner stresses that, in fact, contractors have been cutting employment for years:  &#8220;…while spending on major weapons systems only recently began its post-Iraq and Afghanistan decline, employment at the largest firms in the [defense] industry began falling in 2009 or before. That is at least three years before the current round of budget cuts dictated by the Budget Control Act and long before concern about the impact of sequestration.&#8221;</p>
<p>Speaking as someone who works for a small defense contractor, the timeframe is shorter for smallish firms &#8211; a few hundred employees and below.  Typical programs run a few years &#8211; two or three.  Cuts usually affect work which would replace current programs when they expire.  (It&#8217;s pretty unusual for an existing program to get terminated.)  If new work doesn&#8217;t come in as anticipated then you can usually see &#8216;the cliff&#8217; fairly far in advance &#8211; six months to a year.  That said, it&#8217;s pretty tough to forecast more than a year in advance.  Take anecotes for what they&#8217;re worth but I was watching my own cliff approaching for nearly a year and then just a couple months before &#8216;dropoff&#8217; a new program came in which kept me going for six months and things stabilized &#8211; for awhile &#8211; during that period.  Long term forecasting is difficult.  (Not a deep statement but a truism worth repeating.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: davesnyd</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/cliff-notes/#comment-257526</link>
		<dc:creator>davesnyd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 11:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6008#comment-257526</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your penultimate paragraph would be more believable if there were evidence of adults in both (well, particularly one of the) caucuses. And that Ds knew how *not* to cave.

One can hope...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your penultimate paragraph would be more believable if there were evidence of adults in both (well, particularly one of the) caucuses. And that Ds knew how *not* to cave.</p>
<p>One can hope&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
