Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: STOCK MARKET WATCH - Friday, 27 January 2012 [View all]xchrom
(108,903 posts)24. A Scalpel, Not a Hatchet
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2012/01/obama_s_pentagon_budget_cuts_panetta_s_defense_department_cuts_are_surprisingly_modest_.html
he Pentagon revealed a bit more of its defense budget today, and, really, the proposed cuts in spending amount to no big deal. It would be hard to justify not making these cuts. If Congress winds up wanting to cut deeper, theres plenty of room for more hacking.
First, a word of caution: There are many ways to calculate a cut, and some will no doubt invoke a few to claim that the Obama administrations cuts are severe. Lets go to the numbers.
In his press conference today, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that he will request $525 billion for fiscal year 2013plus $88 billion for overseas contingency operations (aka the wars in Afghanistan and elsewhere, the costs for which have generally been considered separately from the baseline budget).
Some hawks will no doubt scream that this constitutes a cut of $45 billion, or 8 percenta substantial rip for a single year. But this claim is at best misleading. Its true that, a year ago, the Pentagon projected that the budget for FY 2013 (at the time, two years out) would be $571 billion.
he Pentagon revealed a bit more of its defense budget today, and, really, the proposed cuts in spending amount to no big deal. It would be hard to justify not making these cuts. If Congress winds up wanting to cut deeper, theres plenty of room for more hacking.
First, a word of caution: There are many ways to calculate a cut, and some will no doubt invoke a few to claim that the Obama administrations cuts are severe. Lets go to the numbers.
In his press conference today, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that he will request $525 billion for fiscal year 2013plus $88 billion for overseas contingency operations (aka the wars in Afghanistan and elsewhere, the costs for which have generally been considered separately from the baseline budget).
Some hawks will no doubt scream that this constitutes a cut of $45 billion, or 8 percenta substantial rip for a single year. But this claim is at best misleading. Its true that, a year ago, the Pentagon projected that the budget for FY 2013 (at the time, two years out) would be $571 billion.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
69 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The MF Global Bankruptcy Filing: Did the Regulators Sell Out the Public for JP Morgan?
Demeter
Jan 2012
#3
$175 Billion in Loan Losses Not Allocated to Mortgage Backed Securities (Another $300 Billion TO GO)
Demeter
Jan 2012
#9
Tom Ferguson on SOTU: New Financial Fraud Commision Could Actually Slow Down Investigations
Demeter
Jan 2012
#12
Without an educated populace, would the Occupation have come out the way it did?
Demeter
Jan 2012
#47