Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    IncGamers Site Pal Kitteh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    The SPF
    Posts
    8,420

    Alex Salmond; You Idiot

    Alex Salmond announed that he is generously adding 10,000,000 to the college funding in Scotland, yey!



    Oh, and cutting it by 34,000,000...

  2. #2
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Alex Salmond; You Idiot

    Oh, so you hadn't heard about Obamacare? Welcome to the wonderful world of politics.

    I'm sure the difference will be made up for in cost savings and closing of loopholes. No, really.

  3. #3
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Alex Salmond; You Idiot

    Those cuts are all made up. they're on spending that hasn't happened yet. They're cutting planned spending. All the way out to 2022. I'm sure the OP's politician is playing a similar game.

    Also annoying:

    Over time, liberal health-policy types hope that IPAB can be used to introduce rationing into Medicare, using the panel to determine what types of procedures and treatments that Medicare will and will not pay for.
    Over time? How about cut back on BS procedures now! Raise the deductibles now! Means test it now! the program is almost 1T a year!

  4. #4
    Europe Trade Moderator krischan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Posts
    33,221

    Re: Alex Salmond; You Idiot

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    Those cuts are all made up. they're on spending that hasn't happened yet. They're cutting planned spending. All the way out to 2022. I'm sure the OP's politician is playing a similar game.
    I'm confused. So when is it a cut then?

    Cuts are always about planned spending. You cannot make cuts on money which has already been spent, right?* Or do you mean they made cuts on budgets for matters which didn't exist before?

    For me it's a cut if less money has been spent in total than before. Assigning more to one sub-budget and less to another are just bookkeeper tricks, so I'm not going to enter the minefield about making distinctions between separate budgets. If money from one budget is needed somewhere else, the management will find a trick to turn it into a matter of that budget, often with weird and silly consequences. You will certainly find a few dozens of Dilbert comic strips about it.

    * I'm not sure about which kinds of miracles can be produced by bankers, however.
    D3 Trading Forums: Europe - America
    Diablo Wiki / Arreat Summit / ATMA / Forum Rules / Adria
    You know I'm born to lose / and gambling is for fools / but that's the way I like it, baby / I don't want to live forever!

  5. #5
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Alex Salmond; You Idiot

    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    I'm confused. So when is it a cut then?

    Cuts are always about planned spending. You cannot make cuts on money which has already been spent, right?* Or do you mean they made cuts on budgets for matters which didn't exist before?

    For me it's a cut if less money has been spent in total than before. Assigning more to one sub-budget and less to another are just bookkeeper tricks, so I'm not going to enter the minefield about making distinctions between separate budgets. If money from one budget is needed somewhere else, the management will find a trick to turn it into a matter of that budget, often with weird and silly consequences. You will certainly find a few dozens of Dilbert comic strips about it.

    * I'm not sure about which kinds of miracles can be produced by bankers, however.
    I'm not sure about the OP, but in the US the only cut I care about is if it's going to take place in the next ~18 months. More than that and congress flips over and all bets are off. There are exceptions of course. If you are cancelling a program, then you can count on it a bit more, but even then, that spending often goes elsewhere.

    We have a group called the CBO that figures out how much cuts are. We use their baseline projections to make these pronouncements of $1T over 10 years, but that's based on their projections--which are frequently way way off. Plus, if there's planned spending increases, and you say I'm going to reduce those planned increases by X, that's not really a cut, that's a reduction of the increase in spending. It's a game both sides play, and even more frustratingly, both sides massage numbers on. Obamacare was one of those games, Romney's tax plan was another that played that game, even this "draconian" sequestration plays that game. The whole thing is even more complicated because we haven't passed a budget in the senate since Blago was indicted.

    Blago is the nickname for this character (I included a link because he's a local guy):
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Blagojevich

    So when i hear things like the OP saying, hey we cut program A by x dollars, and then we put y dollars back in, you gotta wonder, which of those numbers is over a several year period? is it 34M over ten years, but 10M more this year? is that good policy, or good talking points?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •