Rebuttal of the “sequestration is just a spending growth rate cut” lie

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Rebuttal of the “sequestration is just a spending growth rate cut” lie”.

3 comments

  • I’ve only got one question, why is that bad?
    there is absolutely no reason that we need to be spending 500bn (or even 469bn) on our military. or anything for that matter. that having been said, a 100bn dollar slash may be a mite to fast.

  • You’re the liar. The federal government WILL spend more in 2013 than 2012, more in 2014 than 2013, more in 2015 than 2014. Within that total, faster increases to some portions of the budget mean slower increases, or even cuts, to other portions of the budget – but the total budget will INCREASE. If someone supposedly on a diet, eating 21 pieces of pizza per week, who had planned to start eating 28 pieces, instead starts eating 24, that is not a cut – – even if he reduces the number of mushroom slices to support an increase in pepperoni slices. It’s not a “cut – not the way anyone defines that word outside of Washington. It’s less of an increase than what was planned. Period.

    • This article is about the defense budget, not the total federal budget.

      The total federal budget will increase, that much is true – but DEFENSE SPENDING will be cut DEEPLY and IMMEDIATELY in 2 days – in real terms. On March 1st, the defense budget will be cut from $525 bn today all the way down to $469 bn – the lowest level since 2003 – and will remain significantly below today’s level (in real terms, not in nominal dollars unadjusted for inflation) for the remainder of the sequestration decade (and probably long thereafter). By FY2022, it will still be at $493 bn – $32 bn below today’s level.