Replies

No worries, and thanks for a civil reply.

Here is the OMB letter.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf

The difference between the 9% and the 13% when discussing Defense across the board cuts (and why it is really worse at 13%) is as the letter states: these cuts are now crammed into only 7 months for this fiscal year. Then the madness starts all over again....for another 9 years.

One last article explains why all of this is so destructive:

Sequester Insanity: Why the Pentagon budget cuts are far worse than you think

Both Rush, but to a greater extent Hannity (who is really not that bright) think they have discovered the secret to Nirvana because some Congressman explained to them once that in Baseline Budgets there is a projected increase per year to year.

Well, I hate to break it to them, but most budgets work that way, including company's budgets. There is this thingy called inflation, and many other factors involved.

I could throw the entire Navy and Air Force O&M budgets into reverse for an entire fiscal quarter simply by increasing the cost of oil per barrel by 15%.

I once asked an expert at the Defense Logistics Agency why the Dept of Defense simply build more storage facilities, buy massive quantities of fuel when prices were low, and then sell the excess as needed.

He said that would amount to hedging, and it was prohibited by Congress.

I pressed further, and he explained to me that the the Government does not run the government - K Street lobbyist do.

It was a bit of an oversimplification, but he had a point.

By the way, love your screen name.

Wow . . . Just finished reading the OMB letter only. (not the numbers, yet) No wonder America is in trouble. Gee no radical prejudice or bias agenda in those words, are there, eh?

Zients writes . . .

The Joint Committee sequestration is a blunt and indiscriminate instrument. It was never intended to be implemented and does not represent a responsible way for our Nation to achieve deficit reduction.

Wow, you lay cards on the table, you better be ready to play. If not resign and leave town. Further proof of this administration immaturity

Zients continues to write . . .

On multiple occasions, the President has proposed comprehensive and balanced deficit reduction plans to avoid sequestration.

REALLY? What might that be . . . oh yeah, more tax increases. Very disingenuous. Again not serious minded.

Seriously, If I presented that tone of letter to my CEO in a crucial board meeting, thinking I would have to explain why I still work there.

Again Zients "appears" and I will check to see, he "appears" to be double counting non exempt and non exempt non defense spending. I hate when smart ass bureaucrats do that. Thats why they would never last in the private sector.

Yes, I will keep an open mind and look for the truth. Thank you for sharing

Correct me if I am wrong, but right away I read that there are NO cuts to OCO/GWOT.

Zients or his staff writes . . .(page 1, Basis of Calculations)

As provided by section 101(b) of the CR,

whenever an amount designated for OCO/GWOT (Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)/Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)pursuant to section 251(b) (2)(A) of BBEDCA in either the Department of Defense Apropriations Act, 2012 (division A of Pub. L. 112-74) or in the Military onstruction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012 (division H of Pub. L. 112-74) differs from the amount in the President’s FY 2013 Budget request, the annualized level equals the amount in the President’s FY 2013 Budget request. The CR levels are also adjusted for any transfers mandated by law.

First, want to thank you for posting in that it finally forced me to dig deeper to really understand this mess.

I went to many sites, mostly .gov, but of course they were full of double speak. Found a site that explained it in plain english. Of course you will not accept it since it is a "K Street source. LOL.

Be careful making broad generalizations like the person you talked to. As you know, there are two sides to every sword.

Anyways I found this source.

http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Analysis-of-the-FY-2013-Defese-Budget.pdf

An excellent, non BS plain english explanation. Start at page 9

I will not tell you what to conclude, but for me I walk away with 2 items.

1. There will be a "real" dollar cut to the DOD

2. Considering OCO, mandatory expenditures, outlays, and awarded contracts . . . the total cut over 9 years is less than 5 percent.

Who is to blame is all thats left to argue about. I dont waste my time on that crap. changes nothing