In response to the prospect of a looming economic problem, I have devised a two-pronged strategy to combat the effects of financial hardship. They are from rivaling schools of economic theory and are designed to work together by counteracting each other in the goal of forming a policy that does not venture too far into either extreme. Regrettably, only roughly 40% of tangible finances providing for the continued operation of this entity are available to be altered in budget deliberations. Exact figures were unavailable upon request and the status of this inquiry does not appear likely to improve.
Personal Austerity Package (PAP)
When faced with a potential increase in a basic cost of living, spending cuts are one way to alleviate the perceived toll on the budget associated with these circumstances. These particular austerity measures demand the following:
- a 61% decrease in food, groceries, and dining expenses
- a 40% decrease in social and discretionary expenses
- an 18% decrease in recreational (tobacco/alcohol) expenses
- a 13% decrease in cannabis & medical expenses.
---
Stimulus to Mitigate Emergency & Apply Relief (SMEAR)
In a time of financial difficulty, it is essential to provide allowances for problems firm in the knowledge that the situation will eventually improve. This stimulus looks at certain ways to address the concerns that the PAP may have a negative effect on physical or psychological health by stipulating the following:
- removal of regulations prohibiting the accumulation of outstanding debt
- a 4-month 'grace period' delay in the implementation of the recreational & medical spending cuts
- the successful completion of a tax return
- examination of methods to protect finances without making any adjustments whatsoever to lifestyle following the cuts outlined in PAP (scheduling and strict budgeting of food purchases; bulk purchase of recreational products; procurement of coupons)
