Clinton's Defense Spending Redux

curtiss_leung at ibi.com curtiss_leung at ibi.com
Thu Aug 19 10:01:52 PDT 1999


Max writes:

> To say the Clinton budget contemplates a real

> cut in defense relative to FY1999, one has to

> stipulate an annual (defense) inflation rate of

> no less than 3.2 percent. The Clinton numbers do

> reflect a small cut (aggregate of $42 b over ten

> years) relative to what they define as "current

> services," and current services is supposed to

> be no more than an inflation adjustment. But

> their adjustments exceed their own projections

> of the both the GDP deflator and the CPI. So

> to believe the Clinton budget cuts over the

> decade, you have to believe defense inflation

> will not exceed 3.2%.

> <stuff snipped>

> If you assume just two percent inflation for

> the next ten years (a lower bound, I'd say),

> then it would be accurate to say the Clinton

> budget proposes a $110 billion increase in

> defense over ten years (i.e., $11b a year).

Let me see if I understand this: in order to consider that Clinton's

numbers *cut* the defense budget, one has to accept that the rate of

Defense inflation will be more than 150% (3.2%) of consumer inflation

(2%)? What's the excuse/reason for this?

--

Curtiss



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list