When budgets are cut while spending goes up

[sandnsea]

both at the same time.

Are we honestly all going to pretend that the budget cuts of the past weren't usually called cuts because of inflation, not an actual reduction in the budget.

In 2000, the Dept of Wine and Chocolate spends $1.570 million providing stress relievers.

In 2001, Bush is elected and the budget doubles to $3.140, natch.

Well that's entirely too much fun for the fanaticos, so in 2002 they don't get anymore money.

In every day Washington DC behavior, the DWC howls, Budget Cuts, Budget Cuts. The price of wine and chocolate have increased and there is no way they will be able to service the same number of people they had previously.

That is how budgeting works and has always worked.

So if Obama comes along and doubles this again in 2009, because it hasn't been touched in those oh so many years, and their budget is now at $6.280,

and the next year says let's freeze this, find a way to spend less on wine or cut out the chocolate,

Then he is not...

A. Destroying The Economy or
B. Destroying the ability of agencies to function or
C. Appeasing Republicans or
D. Picking a fight.

He's doing another one of those things we sent him to DC to do - CUT SPENDING.

Or was all that ranting about Republicans Spending Like Drunken Sailors - remember that - was it just a campaign slogan for you?

[Skittles]

1. this argument would wash if he'd cut from the biggest waste of money of all

and we all know what the fuck THAT is

[sandnsea]

2. Oh hey, I'd love to see the defense budget slashed

But unfortunately that's a whole other issue.

[Skittles]

3. yeah? WHY??????

it's just truly FUCKED UP

[sandnsea]

5. We have the role of peacekeeper

And as much as we do a piss poor job of it, we do better than most other countries. It's just the way it is. Wait 20 years and maybe China will have that job and we can get health care.

[leftstreet]

7. Where on earth is the US 'peacekeeping?'

:shrug:

[Skittles]

8. don't even bother, leftstreet

it will be like talking to a table leg

[sandnsea]

11. Thinking you're going to massively cut defense

is what is like talking to a table leg.

[Skittles]

18. what a pile of fucking BULLSHIT

it could be done with real leadership - IT COULD

[sandnsea]

19. It could rain gum drops too

Well, IT COULD!!!

[Skittles]

21. sad

you're very fucking sad - no better than FOX fans

[sandnsea]

22. It's just reality

They aren't going to reduce the military budget, they just aren't.

Reality.

Just like they aren't going to pass single payer.

You want some more reality?

They'll never side with Palestinians over Israel.

They'll never create a jobs program to hire every single worker in the country.

They'll never give everyone a free college education.

They'll never make drugs legal.

They'll never stop praying in the Capitol.

I could go on and on. You live where you live.

[Capers]

4. I don't think we'll hear much about this after the SOTU post-game show.

[sandnsea]

6. So you didn't mind the Republican spending spree? n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

9. Some of the wine and chocolate is Medicaid and unemployment benefits

If the demand for Medicaid and unemployment goes up and there's a spending freeze...

If we're going to focus on cutting the deficit, I'd prefer a method of evaluating all government programs and cutting the more wasteful or less beneficial ones to a blanket freeze.

[sandnsea]

10. Those are entitlements and can't be cut

But you knew that and are pretending to be obtuse about it the same way Rachel Maddow did.

They also proposed a commission to study what to cut - but you freaked out over that too.

[Hello_Kitty]

12. Unemployment and Medicaid are not entitlements in the same way that Medicare and SS are.

And sandnsea, you better learn about a guy named Pete Peterson before you assume there's nothing to freak out about this commission to "study" the defict.

So we're now dissing Rachel Maddow?

[sandnsea]

15. They must be paid, By Law

That's what makes them an entitlement, along with certain welfare benefits, VA benefits, and the like. They can't cut them out of an annual budget.

I don't care who Pete Peterson is, there's no other way to get to the pork in the budget without a commission or similar panel. It's been recommended for nearly a decade now.

I "diss" whoever needs dissing, and last night, Rachel did. Oh, and as to Krugman, well that's not surprising.

[Hello_Kitty]

13. Psst...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7573341&mesg_id=7573341

Ruh roh. Looks like the Nobel Prize winning hero of DU doesn't like it either.

:rofl:

[Winterblues]

14. "It's the economy, stupid"

:shrug: cutting spending is important but it is what spending gets cut. We are going to freeze spending for cancer research while increasing spending for the War Machine..This will not fix any economic problems but only exacerbate the problems.

[sandnsea]

24. We are? Who said so?

That's not how this will work. NIH may decide to increase cancer research and cut an outreach program about worms in kids or something. The point is to do exactly what he said he would do in the campaign, cut programs that don't work.

[Cha]

16. Jared Bernstein reality for the terminally upset.

<snip>

Second, a little background on freeze-eology: there are two ways to do a freeze like this: (1) an across-the-board freeze on every program outside of national security; and (2) a surgical approach where overall totals are frozen but some individual programs go up and others go down. In short, a hatchet versus a scalpel.

During the campaign, you may recall that John McCain touted option 1: the hatchet approach of an across-the-board freeze.

The President was critical of that approach then, and we would be critical of it now. It's not what we're proposing. To the contrary, the entire theory of the President's proposed freeze is to dial up the stuff that will support job growth and innovation while dialing down the stuff that doesn't. Under our plan, some discretionary spending will go up; some will go down. That's a big difference from a hatchet.

Take, for example, the policies we announced yesterday -- a significant expansion (a 20% increase) in a program that provides services for seniors, like respite care and in-home services; a program to limit student loan repayments to 10 percent of income (after living expenses); an expansion of two tax credits, one for child care and another for retirement savings.

<more>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/budget-freeze-eology-101_b_437277.html

[Mari333]

17. cut the defense dept

[laughingliberal]

20. Forgive me if I think there will be more than wine and chocolate cut

This sounds like FOX new picking apart the stimulus bill

"OOOO. they're spending millions to save a frog in Pelosi's district"

I've been fighting the RW on the Beavis and Butthead type talking points for years. Never thought I'd have to fight a President of my own party on this crap. Or a member of my own party, for that matter.

[sandnsea]

23. There's no Dept of Wine and Chocolate

You know that, right?

The post is about the budgeting process, not who gets what money. Good grief.