Hoyer: it's a decrease in forward spending

[GURPS]

Hoyer Called Out for Falsely Accusing Trump of Cutting Funding for Medical Research


"Well, you say that but the President has just proposed a $5.5 billion cut which is about a 15 percent cut in NIH," Hoyer claimed.

"Is that a cut or is that a decrease in forward spending over time?" Sullivan asked.

"Well it's a decrease, it's a decrease in forward spending, you're correct on that but it's a decrease in terms of effort because as inflation occurs obviously a dollar doesn't buy tomorrow or the next year or five years from now what it buys today," Hoyer said. "So, yes, okay, fine, nominally you have an increase, but if you have an increase of five cents and the product cost you another 15 cents you have a decrease."

when is a cut not a cut ...... when it is a decrease in forward spending

 

[Gilligan]

What is this "inflation" Hoyer is prattling on about? When was it last 15%...or even 5%?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I doubt it'll pass Congress, but Trump's budget increases spending. $4.1 Trillion in 2018 to $5.7 Trillion in 2027. That's all assuming a 3% yearly growth and receipts that are wildly overblown. It's quite amazing that his budget proposes an extra $900 billion in spending in 2027 compared to 2018 and yet we get people like Hoyer saying this dumb ####.

While his budget shows he's not too keen on actually rolling back any sort of spending, he's also willing to axe 66 programs, saving $26.7 billion (well, not really saving, moving it around).
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/334768-here-are-the-66-programs-eliminated-in-trumps-budget

 

[This_person]

(well, not really saving, moving it around)

Of course it won't pass Congress as is. We said that about Obama's budgets, too. But, we all know the truth is the president recommends priorities, and Congress adjusts accordingly.



It is really saving, not just moving around. I say that because the alternative is the same amount of money for everyone else, and MORE money for the programs cut.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Of course it won't pass Congress as is. We said that about Obama's budgets, too. But, we all know the truth is the president recommends priorities, and Congress adjusts accordingly.



It is really saving, not just moving around. I say that because the alternative is the same amount of money for everyone else, and MORE money for the programs cut.

If overall govt. spending increases, I'm not sure how you can argue we're saving money.

If I spend $500 more per month than I make instead of $1,000 more per month more than I make, I'm not saving money. I'm hemorrhaging it a little less.

 

[Hijinx]

when is a cut not a cut ...... when it is a decrease in forward spending

Old Steny knows how to lie with a straight face. He has been doing it for years.

I hope I out live him so I can celebrate the day he leaves.


What is amazing is that someone actually asked him about the lie.

 

[Rommey]

Presidential budgets rarely, if ever, get passed. And whatever budget makes it through the Congress might address some of the President's items, but most will likely be changed so much that it will be hard to figure how much of the proposal actually made it into the budget. Of course this assumes Congress actually does their job and pass a budget.