How would you spend three billion dollars spent on Iraq war?

High speed rail on the east coast from Miami to Boston with only 10 stops (including one in Raleigh for Bear). Think of the reduced ware and congestion on I-95. Point one on Engineer's infrastructure renewal plan. I know the rest of the country would feel left out, but a lot of the population of the country is on this corridor and I have other projects for the rest of the country.

Math check!

First, bad news for Engineer: the high-speed rail on East Coast will cost a minimum of $50 billion (the French TGV already made the study), so the $3 billion budgeted by engineer will barely be enough to pay for another study.

Next, good news for Bear: that plan would cost only $ 3 million, leaving a lot of change from the $ 3 billion promised by BBB.

Truly godawful news for all of us: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are expected to cost ultimately $ 3 trillion. That's trillion, with a "T".

Y'all off by 3 orders of magnitude.

As the fifth year of the war draws to a close, operating costs (spending on the war itself, what you might call "running expenses") for 2008 are projected to exceed $12.5 billion a month for Iraq alone, up from $4.4 billion in 2003, and with Afghanistan the total is $16 billion a month. ...Even so, it does not include the $500 billion we already spend per year on the regular expenses of the Defence Department. Nor does it include other hidden expenditures, such as intelligence gathering, or funds mixed in with the budgets of other departments.

trains are so much more economical than trucking... why did we give them up in the first place?

Partly rhetorical I'm sure it had to do with contributions to politicians.

trains are so much more economical than trucking... why did we give them up in the first place?

Partly rhetorical I'm sure it had to do with contributions to politicians.

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

trains are so much more economical than trucking... why did we give them up in the first place?

Partly rhetorical I'm sure it had to do with contributions to politicians.

How do you figure that?
Do you see rain tracks running to every store, gas station, mom and pop store, and every other business in the country?
How do you think goods and freight get to the different merchants around the country, and to the railroad terminals?

mysteryman wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

trains are so much more economical than trucking... why did we give them up in the first place?

Partly rhetorical I'm sure it had to do with contributions to politicians.

How do you figure that?
Do you see rain tracks running to every store, gas station, mom and pop store, and every other business in the country?
How do you think goods and freight get to the different merchants around the country, and to the railroad terminals?

sigh.... what is cheaper a big truck picking up his load at the Wichita spur delivering it locally or trucks riding all the hell over the country 24/7?