If you cut federal spending by 20% across the board on "Day 1"

No.

Federal budgets could probably be cut by 20% simply by changing the rules on how cost centers get their budget for the following year.

I remember when I was in the Navy that we'd be going on spending sprees as the end of the fiscal year approached because the gov't has the awesome notion that if you didn't need the money this year, then you don't need it for next year and thus your budget gets slashed.   So, whether you need the money or not, every cost center spends like crazy to use up their budget around that time.  The level of waste that is just systemically ingrained is kinda crazy.

If the gov't can run effectively with a million fewer employees, then we've got a million too many employed as it is, so aside from the impact on unemployment numbers, I see very little reason to not do that, anyway.  The gov't should be building the economy, not acting as a surrogate employer because they cannot figure out how to.

Well said.  Look at Caterpillar.  During the start of the downturn they announced they were laying off 200,000 employees.  You do not go from needing 200,000 people to NOT needing 200,000 people overnight.  You were fat and happy and overstaffed.  Then things got tight and you realized, wait... I don't need all these people.

That being said they did over compensate and have hired some back.  But the point remains.

ETA: I'm not supporting a 20% across the board cut.  Just stating that government is indeed over bloated.

The ripple effect would destroy the economy. You'd have layoffs across the board, everything from military suppliers to universities to travel agencies. It would be interesting to find out what percentage of the workforce is indirectly dependent on federal expenditure.

Wow, just found the answer: Fuller testimony on sequestration

Which is why it'd need a Methadone type graduated withdrawal instead of a cold-turkey correction.

It'll never happen, however.

Nobody does anything in Washington in one day... they hold a press conference and sign a piece of paper that that puts changes into effect after the next election. You get to claim you did something during the campaign, but you do not have to answer for problems it caused. Obama may have not had any experience, but he sure learned that fast.

I have zero problems with 5% cuts across the board every year for 4 years.... with zero increases in spending so it isn't just another "projected" shell game.

FIFY