Changes at CIA and DoD

[grumbler]

He has the most pertinent qualification - the ability to handle a large complex budget and make required cuts.

He does have experience with budgets, I'll grant.  But making cuts??

Might have been before your time.  There was a President named Clinton, and Panetta was his budget director (and later Chief of Staff).  Clinton had a budget surplus, due mostly to downsizing government (total government expenditures dropping during Panetta's terms from 22% of GDP to 18% of GDP).

I know it is hard to believe that government spending could be cut, but it has happened.  And, frankly, there isn't anyone else at this level in the US government (or who has experience at this level) who has any experience in budget-cutting.  Other people just don't believe in it.

[derspiess]

That's how you define budget-cutting?

[Tonitrus]

That's how you define budget-cutting?

Why not, since when did GDP growth matter?

[Barrister]

That's how you define budget-cutting?

Why not, since when did GDP growth matter?

It matters - a lot.

But it doesn't equal budget cutting either.

[grumbler]

That's how you define budget-cutting?

Do you really expect me to respond to the Yicratic method forever?  Do you actually have a point you want to make?

[The Minsky Moment]

Let's say the defense budget was currently only $83 billion and had been that way since 1945.

There would there would be a sense in which one could say that the defense budget had never been cut since the height of WW2.