Reply
Thu 25 Oct, 2007 10:14 am
2.4 Trillion
Just soak that number in for a second. That's a lot of money. It's the cost of the wars we are fighting when projected out ten years, with interest payments.
This is based upon a CBO report projecting out the costs of the war.
Quote:
The CBO's projection is not "pure speculation." In fact, the report considers a range of predictions about the U.S. military presence in Iraq, consistent with the administration's desire for Korea-like, "enduring" occupation of Iraq. For example, in one scenario, the CBO predicts 30,000 troops deployed for the "war on terrorism" until FY2017. In another, they predict a more "gradual" decline to 75,000 by the start of fiscal year 2013 until 2017.
While the White House may not be "worried about the number," the cost is certain to be harmful to the economy. "t's clear under analysis that the nation is on an unstable fiscal path," CBO Director Peter Orszag told Congress today. The "higher debt and interest costs, is going to cause severe economic dislocation, which are exacerbated by war costs."
USA Today notes, "In the months before the March 2003 Iraq invasion, the Bush administration estimated the Iraq war would cost no more than $50 billion."
UPDATE:
ThinkProgress
We can't afford this!
Do you Republicans realize what a drain on our gov't and society that this war represents?
And that it is all being paid for on loan?
When do you think we are going to start paying those loans off?
I would note that the war hawks who said the whole thing would cost "50 billion" were off - by a factor of more then 40.
Cycloptichorn
How many people could get healthcare for half that money?
I would note the war hawks that said the whole thing would be paid for with Iraqi oil profits.
Has ANY of it?
Cheney's new Buick has been paid for.
squinney wrote:I would note the war hawks that said the whole thing would be paid for with Iraqi oil profits.
Has ANY of it?
Once Bushco and other American corporations secure access to the oil reserves, you will begin seeing a lot of things paid for with Iraqi oil profits--probably not a lot of Iraqi things paid for with their oil profits mind you....
The link to the data is on
this thread.
It's easy to joke about the topic, but it's a serious thing.
How could people who are supposedly 'business-trained executives' screw up so horrifically when it came to cost projections?
How is it possible that the over-run for the war costs has risen so high, yet supposedly 'conservative' Republicans don't do one damn thing to try and cut costs. They don't even seem to care at all.
How can they bitch about expanding SCHIP while simultaneously voting to give billions more per year to the war effort, with no oversight?!?!?!!
Condi is testifying now in front of Waxman's committee, and she's got plenty of evasions and non-answers when it comes to the fact that there basically is no oversight in Iraq. Period. And they don't want there to be, b/c it is their political allies and corporate allies who are benefitting from the lack of oversight.
Iraq wasn't an invasion of a foreign country at all. It was an invasion of the US treasury, opening it up to unrestrained and unregulated looting by Corporate vultures.
Cycloptichorn
This was brought out by my congressman, John Spratt, a great guy.
Polled congressional staff recently voted him as the congressman who would make the best president.
Cyclo:
I fully agree with you, pal. We need to get our fiscal house in order, but fast.
My method is simple: Pay the interest on the debt, 10% at present (thereabouts, anyway.), put another 5% against retiring the National Debt and all the rest of the budget is "fed" from what is left over.
This also means holding Congress to a balanced budget. Period!
I have argued this line of reasoning before, in other threads. I consider it essential to the continuation of this Country in freedom.
This cannot be just a Government thing, each and every one of us has to "buy into" the program. That means we have to turn away, a bit, from our greedy ways with a genuine concern for solving a serious National problem.
The only question remains...... can a lot of us do that? I'm willing, but I can't do it alone, nor can you. Only "We, the people" can. Anything other than solution will result in giving us exactly the Government we deserve and the standard of living we deserve. It won't be pretty.
Interim steps:
1) END THE WAR WITH NO END NOW!
2) Put a freeze on further entitlement expansions or new programs (except for COLA on existing), until we get an idea of what is affordable.
3) Adjust income taxes accordingly so that our primary goal can be achieved; that of living within our means.
4) Make penalties for Government Contractors very severe for "Cost Overruns". It seems like virtually every program/contract has "cost overruns". Not acceptable! (If you can't come up with a cost figure within a reasonable margin of error, say 3%, hire new financial cost accountants!)
5) A complete moritorium on ALL "earmarks". In fact, make them illegal, so individual Congresspersons have an excuse NOT to "pay off" political favors. (I know, it's "part of the game".....but should it be?)
The above means a lot of haggling and compromise in Congress, but it HAS to be done. Particularly if one has any concern for the future generations of this Nation. I know I do.
Halfback
Halfback wrote:Cyclo:
I fully agree with you, pal. We need to get our fiscal house in order, but fast.
My method is simple: Pay the interest on the debt, 10% at present (thereabouts, anyway.), put another 5% against retiring the National Debt and all the rest of the budget is "fed" from what is left over.
This also means holding Congress to a balanced budget. Period!
I have argued this line of reasoning before, in other threads. I consider it essential to the continuation of this Country in freedom.
This cannot be just a Government thing, each and every one of us has to "buy into" the program. That means we have to turn away, a bit, from our greedy ways with a genuine concern for solving a serious National problem.
The only question remains...... can a lot of us do that? I'm willing, but I can't do it alone, nor can you. Only "We, the people" can. Anything other than solution will result in giving us exactly the Government we deserve and the standard of living we deserve. It won't be pretty.
Interim steps:
1) END THE WAR WITH NO END NOW!
2) Put a freeze on further entitlement expansions or new programs (except for COLA on existing), until we get an idea of what is affordable.
3) Adjust income taxes accordingly so that our primary goal can be achieved; that of living within our means.
4) Make penalties for Government Contractors very severe for "Cost Overruns". It seems like virtually every program/contract has "cost overruns". Not acceptable! (If you can't come up with a cost figure within a reasonable margin of error, say 3%, hire new financial cost accountants!)
5) A complete moritorium on ALL "earmarks". In fact, make them illegal, so individual Congresspersons have an excuse NOT to "pay off" political favors. (I know, it's "part of the game".....but should it be?)
The above means a lot of haggling and compromise in Congress, but it HAS to be done. Particularly if one has any concern for the future generations of this Nation. I know I do.
Halfback
Agreed.
When it comes to earmarks, I think that - even though they don't represent a large percentage of the budget - they are quite symbolic.
One thing that would help... mandatory term limits for Congressmen and Senators...
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
How can they bitch about expanding SCHIP while simultaneously voting to give billions more per year to the war effort, with no oversight?!?!?!!
If you believe that their motivation is to "starve the beast," these two things are quite compatible. (I've seen some convincing arguments, I'm not sure.)
Basically -- spend so much money that there is none left for various service programs, and those programs need to fold.
It isn't just the Republicans. I hold the whimpish Democrats who are incapable of mustering up the country's enthusiasm for ordering lunch, much less ending a war, just as responsible. I hold the citizens who put them all in office and then closed their eyes responsible. I hold the majority of our citizens who don't even bother to vote with the greatest responsibility for the mess.
The only war in the world is the result of US paranoia, imagine how those Trillions could have been used to improve the lot of American citizens; a less intrusive American foreign policy would make the world a safer place; the US Government is the architect of all the loathing directed at your country... You could have had a health service that would have been the envy of the world but the Bush regime decided the Trillions would be better spent killing, maiming and destroying another sovereign state and what about those young American's who answered their countries call, why did they die?
anton wrote:The only war in the world is the result of US paranoia, imagine how those Trillions could have been used to improve the lot of American citizens; a less intrusive American foreign policy would make the world a safer place; the US Government is the architect of all the loathing directed at your country... You could have had a health service that would have been the envy of the world but the Bush regime decided the Trillions would be better spent killing, maiming and destroying another sovereign state and what about those young American's who answered their countries call, why did they die?
It is not so much the U.S. government that is at fault as is the Republican leadership of the government over the last 6.5 years.
Cyclo:
Agreed, I say twelve years for all! Pres, Senate, House! At least that would get some people in Congress who has an idea of what life is outside the DC Beltway.
Some of those cats been in there so long they believe they can "will" their seats when they retire. (Moynahan {NY} did!)
Halfback
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace