The federal government has proven this method to work, though in budgeting rather than weight loss. But considering the fed’s fiscal obesity, the analogy transfers fairly well.
Here’s how it works. You plan your weight next year to be 200 pounds more than it is now. After that you eat all you can. Next year you count the difference between your projected weight and your actual weight as lost tonnage. That’s it. Now even you can be, as they say in reality TV, a big loser.
This is foolishness you say? In the real world perhaps, but Washington doesn’t live in a real world. It does its annual budgets in much the same way as this weight loss program. Let me explain.
The federal budget by law increases each year by a certain percentage. (It’s called baseline budgeting if you want to look it up.) But then let’s say a frugal politician suggests fiscal responsibility by increasing the budget less than the projected increase. Now that politician can be tared and feathered by his political opponents and the media for wanting draconian cuts; yes, even though the budget would still increase. Like the “lost weight”, it is still considered a cut.
So why does this happen? That’s not important. What is important is that politicians can use it to call increases cuts and cuts increases, depending on if they are attacking their opponents, defending themselves against attacks, or politicking Only economic morons buy it though. And no one need be an economic moron. One need only look at the numbers. You’ll see that “draconian” cuts are still increases and increases can still be called cuts. For more information on baseline budgeting for goodness sake Google it. We are, after all, living in the age of the internet.