On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Robert Naiman
<[email protected]> wrote:
> The cuts *so far* are about what the Pentagon was already starting to
> prepare for as a result of Obama's directive. The cuts that would come
> as a result of the automatic trigger, or if something like that is
> included in the Gang of Twelve agreement, are a different story.
>
>
> A $350 billion cut over 10 years - which the White House says was
> agreed to in the first round (extrapolating from the first round), and
> which is roughly equivalent to the $400 billion in cuts over 12 years
> that the Administration already directed the Pentagon to prepare,
> would roughly hold the Pentagon at 2% inflation a year and would be a
> 7% cut from currently projected spending.
>
> Ezra knows less about this than I do.

I have no doubt that you know much much more about this than Ezra. It
does seem that you agree with Ezra that the only way this turns into a
Pentagon cut over and above what Obama already told the Pentagon to
find is if the trigger gets invoked, or if a Pentagon cuts are agreed
to as part of a deal to avoid the trigger.

>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Gar Lipow <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Robert Naiman
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The thing is, reality just turned a corner. When forced to choose
>>> between raising taxes and cutting the military budget, Republicans in
>>> Congress chose to cut the military budget. It is likely that if
>>> Republicans in Congress are forced to confront this choice again - and
>>> it is likely that they will be so confronted - they will choose again
>>> to cut military spending, rather than raise taxes.
>>
>>
>> Not really. According to Ezra and number of mainstream commentators
>> the cuts were compared to no change in military spending. Whereas some
>> very modest reductions were already in future pentagon plans. And
>> these cuts were actually smaller than what the Pentagon planned. So
>> in truth the "cut" was a modest INCREASE for the Pentagon compare to
>> their existing plans.
>>
>> Facebook: Gar Lipow  Twitter: GarLipow
>> Grist Blog: http://www.grist.org/member/1598
>> Static page: http://www.nohairshirts.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> pen-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>



-- 
Facebook: Gar Lipow  Twitter: GarLipow
Grist Blog: http://www.grist.org/member/1598
Static page: http://www.nohairshirts.com
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to