Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (361190)	12/3/2007 12:30:45 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574000

American whites enslaved Africans and brought them to work here as indentured servants. It was more than a 1% cut per year. A lot more. 92 to 99 is 7 years. 5.4 divided by 7 is about .77, but that is .77% of the entire federal budget, in '99 the military budget was only 15.3% of the federal budget, so the per year cut is .77% times the reciprocal of 15.3% (15.3% is .153 or 153/1000, so you multiply by 1000/153, or you can simply device by .153) .77% is .0077. .0077/.153 is about .05 so its about a 5% cut a year in military spending. And that's in nominal spending, the decrease in real spending would be 5% per year plus the inflation rate. inflationdata.com Shows about 18.97% inflation from 92 to 99. (prices increased faster for military items, but I'll ignore that point, I'm just trying to get a "real dollar figure). 18.97% / 7 is 2.71 so you now have a 7.7 % cut. And of course the total cut is not the cut per year, so you have a 53.9% cut. But all the calculations above assume a constant federal budget and the budget was increasing so the total cut won't be as large. The spending increased from about $1.4 tril to about 1.7 trillion. That's about a 21% increase. So change the total defense cut to lets say 30%. 30% is usually considered large enough to be a slash. Certainly the results where a slash (18 to 10 army divisions etc.) I would define 'slash' as 30%+ in a year. Well than I should never hear you complaining about slashes in social spending.