Super Commitee failed.

[cjjtulsa]

And is it not true that "cuts" by the government's definition typically means a reduction in the amount of increased spending?

 

[HMFIC]

Maybe next one will be the "super duper" comittee. Now they will get it all done.

HA! I needed that laugh. Thanks.

 

[vvvvvvv]

I think your math is off somewhere. If $10B/day were cut for 2 weeks (14 days) it would only come out to $140 billion. This is only a little over 10% of the $1.2 trillion target. $1.2 trillion in spending cuts (if the $10B/day starting point is correct) would be more like 17 weeks of spending.

The $1.2T is over 10 years, which amounts to $120B per year. All federal government spending is described in 10-year projections.

Furthermore, Congress cannot be bound over, which means that any changes past the current year are non-binding and therefore non-existent.

 

[soonerwings]

And is it not true that "cuts" by the government's definition typically means a reduction in the amount of increased spending?

It's all in the wording. "Deficit" is used as an annual term where "debt" is the aggregate of yearly deficits. When politicians speak of cutting the deficit, you are correct that they are only talking about reducing the amount they spend relative to what's actually brought in. You can reduce the deficit while still allowing the total debt to increase. Sucks huh?

 

[soonerwings]

The $1.2T is over 10 years, which amounts to $120B per year. All federal government spending is described in 10-year projections.

Furthermore, Congress cannot be bound over, which means that any changes past the current year are non-binding and therefore non-existent.

Gotcha. I stand corrected on my methodology. It would indeed be 17 weeks of spending over 10 years so 1.7 weeks per year. NOT EVEN 2 full weeks/year. What exactly has this committee been doing?

 

[vvvvvvv]

It's all in the wording. "Deficit" is used as an annual term where "debt" is the aggregate of yearly deficits. When politicians speak of cutting the deficit, you are correct that they are only talking about reducing the amount they spend relative to what's actually brought in. You can reduce the deficit while still allowing the total debt to increase. Sucks huh?

If the $1.2T cuts remain the same for the next 10 years (which NEVER happens), that means that our deficit spending per year only increases by $200B rather than $320B.

 

[soonerwings]

If the $1.2T cuts remain the same for the next 10 years (which NEVER happens), that means that our deficit spending per year only increases by $200B rather than $320B.

It's actually worse than that. The OMB projections show deficits of $600-700 billion every year for the next 10 years.