Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Report says Bush wars cost average US family


Bob26003

Recommended Posts

Iraq, Afghanistan wars twice as expensive as expected, report says

Nick Juliano

Published: Tuesday November 13, 2007

del.icio.us del.icio.us

Print This Email This

'Hidden costs' behind skyrocketing price of war

President Bush's six-year invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq will end up costing Americans about $1.5 trillion, or nearly twice as much as the White House has actually spent to fight its wars, because of unseen costs like inflation, rising oil prices and expensive care for wounded veterans.

The estimate was revealed in a Democratic staff report from Congress's Joint Economic Committee. The staff report, titled "The Hidden Costs of the Iraq War," estimates that the Iraq and Afghan wars have cost the average family more than $20,000.

"The full economic costs of the war to the American taxpayers and the overall U.S. economy go well beyond even the immense federal budget costs already reported," said the report, which was obtained by the Washington Post.

The White House apparently has vastly underestimated the war's costs. It requested $804 billion -- just more than half the total costs -- to keep up its wars and occupations through 2008.

"The report argues that war funding is diverting billions of dollars away from "productive investment" by American businesses in the United States. It also says that the conflicts are pulling reservists and National Guardsmen away from their jobs, resulting in economic disruptions for U.S. employers that the report estimates at $1 billion to $2 billion," reports the Post's Josh White.

Furthermore, the report takes into account the massive healthcare costs for injured veterans and the declining economic productivity of vets who return home seriously injured. It also takes into account the massive interest the US will have to pay on the borrowed money that is funding the war.

Continues......... http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Iraq_Afghani...nsive_1113.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • AROCES

    28

  • Bob26003

    12

  • Unlimited

    11

  • Atheist God

    6

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Is this from the same group that claims Bush's economy "Worst Economy Of Our Lifetime"? we must be getting closer and closer to the primaries and the general Presidential election. I'm seeing more and more nonsense posts about money and the economy then ever before!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this from the same group that claims Bush's economy "Worst Economy Of Our Lifetime"? we must be getting closer and closer to the primaries and the general Presidential election. I'm seeing more and more nonsense posts about money and the economy then ever before!

maybe you have an extra 20 grand lying around...I dont...why is it nonsense?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the media, who have failed to shed light on this. They report big numbers, but NEVER what those number cost the individual family. Nor do the Democrats, because most of them voted for the spending.

There is nothing on this earth that can stop this evil, which is far greater than a handful of "terrorists." Imagine the infrastructure which could of been paid for with a trillion dollars. Imagine the teachers you could of hired. Imagine the quality teachers you could of hired.

We're faced with an evil which cannot cleanse itself. When the voters are misled by a media, which itself has become corrupted, then the republic is lost.

It will take supernatural help to unveil this evil and sweep it away. What man cannot do himself, God will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're faced with an evil which cannot cleanse itself. When the voters are misled by a media, which itself has become corrupted, then the republic is lost.

It will take supernatural help to unveil this evil and sweep it away. What man cannot do himself, God will do.

nice...hopefully that help will come?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe you have an extra 20 grand lying around...I dont...why is it nonsense?...

Its nonsense because it doesn't make much sense. are you short 20 grand? or is this the worst economy in your life time? whats a better unemployement rate 4.7 or 7.5 percent. how about interest rates at 20 percent or inflation 12% also know as the “misery index” lets not forget Carter didn't have the 20 million or so illegal immigrants Bush has. the reason its nonsense is because its coming from the far left and its close to election time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets not forget Carter didn't have the 20 million or so illegal immigrants Bush has. the reason its nonsense is because its coming from the far left and its close to election time.

he's using the illegals to benefit the elite...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this from the same group that claims Bush's economy "Worst Economy Of Our Lifetime"? we must be getting closer and closer to the primaries and the general Presidential election. I'm seeing more and more nonsense posts about money and the economy then ever before!

Yes, they claim that majority of Americans are barely making it and that most are really suffering from the economic condition.

Walmart just posted a profit of higher than expected, and guess who Walmart caters to? The low end consumers.

So many are suffering and so they just shop. how sad........ :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this from the same group that claims Bush's economy "Worst Economy Of Our Lifetime"? we must be getting closer and closer to the primaries and the general Presidential election. I'm seeing more and more nonsense posts about money and the economy then ever before!

You have an economy that is built on fundamentally unsound grounds, financed by heavy borrowing both by the government and by consumers in the United States, that is dependent on people expecting the US to adequately pay its interest payments and ensure the value of the loans towards it. The instance something changes that situation - if, for example, the Chinese decide they just can't keep buying increasingly worthless American Treasury Bonds with a deflating dollar, and switch to purchasing Euros - you have economic collapse in America, as the whole house of cards come crashing down. The deficit spending on Iraq simply complements that shaky foundation, by increasing the amount of money that the US has to dedicate out of its tax revenues to servicing interest payments and other costs that don't return any kind of real economic or social benefit. Meaning, of course, that when the US does want to finance some project, the above means they generally have to -wait for it - borrow more money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have an economy that is built on fundamentally unsound grounds, financed by heavy borrowing both by the government and by consumers in the United States, that is dependent on people expecting the US to adequately pay its interest payments and ensure the value of the loans towards it. The instance something changes that situation - if, for example, the Chinese decide they just can't keep buying increasingly worthless American Treasury Bonds with a deflating dollar, and switch to purchasing Euros - you have economic collapse in America, as the whole house of cards come crashing down. The deficit spending on Iraq simply complements that shaky foundation, by increasing the amount of money that the US has to dedicate out of its tax revenues to servicing interest payments and other costs that don't return any kind of real economic or social benefit. Meaning, of course, that when the US does want to finance some project, the above means they generally have to -wait for it - borrow more money!

Well said, that pretty much the long and short of it right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they claim that majority of Americans are barely making it and that most are really suffering from the economic condition.

Walmart just posted a profit of higher than expected, and guess who Walmart caters to? The low end consumers.

So many are suffering and so they just shop. how sad........ :blink:

Really, who else would be in a better position than walmart to make money right now. For one the decline of our currency doesn't even effect them, even though Walmart is highly dependent on foreign markets they have been diversifying their profits in foreign currency for years now, you can call them an American company but they really aren't one on paper.

When a war happens the society is supposed to make sacrifices to counter the financial and social negatives that come with waging war. Think of WWII.

But before we went to war our president said, if you wanna help your country go shopping. And so we did, and now we are in a horrible credit crunch, even now our own home which is supposed to be the American family's foundation for their assets is pretty much worthless and just another debt we will pay for most of our lives. And that is the Fed's fault as well because they ignored the sub-prime problems and let the fraud of the refinancing mortgage business destroy our housing market infrastructure.

I don't see how people can question the validity of the above article, this information isn't new, its just not talked about much. Don't deny it just cause you don't understand how finances work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, who else would be in a better position than walmart to make money right now. For one the decline of our currency doesn't even effect them, even though Walmart is highly dependent on foreign markets they have been diversifying their profits in foreign currency for years now, you can call them an American company but they really aren't one on paper.

When a war happens the society is supposed to make sacrifices to counter the financial and social negatives that come with waging war. Think of WWII.

But before we went to war our president said, if you wanna help your country go shopping. And so we did, and now we are in a horrible credit crunch, even now our own home which is supposed to be the American family's foundation for their assets is pretty much worthless and just another debt we will pay for most of our lives. And that is the Fed's fault as well because they ignored the sub-prime problems and let the fraud of the refinancing mortgage business destroy our housing market infrastructure.

I don't see how people can question the validity of the above article, this information isn't new, its just not talked about much. Don't deny it just cause you don't understand how finances work.

Your doom and gloom economic propaganda is on it's 7th year and Bush term is almost over.

I say give it up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your doom and gloom economic propaganda is on it's 7th year and Bush term is almost over.

I say give it up!

what's gonna happen is the dems are gonna win in 08..and the mess bush has made!! will make the economy so bad that they will lose again in 2012...and the vicious circle will continue...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what's gonna happen is the dems are gonna win in 08..and the mess bush has made!! will make the economy so bad that they will lose again in 2012...and the vicious circle will continue...?

Oh no! no! no! IF a Dem wins the Whit house, all the doom and gloom economic propaganda will disappear and a recovry and good economic forcast will replace it. Even if unemployment goes to 10%, the talking point is if not for the Dem in the White house it could have been 20%. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its nonsense because it doesn't make much sense. are you short 20 grand? or is this the worst economy in your life time? whats a better unemployement rate 4.7 or 7.5 percent. how about interest rates at 20 percent or inflation 12% also know as the “misery index” lets not forget Carter didn't have the 20 million or so illegal immigrants Bush has. the reason its nonsense is because its coming from the far left and its close to election time.

It makes complete sense. You should read the report or at least the reporting on it in more detail rather than a knee jerk reaction. The wars are costing a huge fortune that is borrowed and will continue to cost us for a very very long time. That's all it says. The cost of borrowing will add a huge burden to my children. The cost of rearming and the cost of veterans over time is larger even than almost any war in the past. They used reasonable estimates and invited ANYONE to knock it down. Nothing about Bush's current economic disaster. Don't try to link this to your other issues.

Also where did you get the idea that during the Carter admin - 30+ years ago by the way - that we did not have very large numbers of illegal immigrants? This is not a new problem. It has existed for many many years. They did not simply appear during the last few years. In fact, illegal immigration, legal immigration and tourism to the US has become much more difficult in the past few years. What's new is that many people want you to be afraid of it because of "9/11". It will not change anytime soon and trying to link it to the cost of the Iraq war is not useful either since little actual money is spent on illegal immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes complete sense. You should read the report or at least the reporting on it in more detail rather than a knee jerk reaction. The wars are costing a huge fortune that is borrowed and will continue to cost us for a very very long time. That's all it says. The cost of borrowing will add a huge burden to my children. The cost of rearming and the cost of veterans over time is larger even than almost any war in the past. They used reasonable estimates and invited ANYONE to knock it down. Nothing about Bush's current economic disaster. Don't try to link this to your other issues.

Also where did you get the idea that during the Carter admin - 30+ years ago by the way - that we did not have very large numbers of illegal immigrants? This is not a new problem. It has existed for many many years. They did not simply appear during the last few years. In fact, illegal immigration, legal immigration and tourism to the US has become much more difficult in the past few years. What's new is that many people want you to be afraid of it because of "9/11". It will not change anytime soon and trying to link it to the cost of the Iraq war is not useful either since little actual money is spent on illegal immigration.

The war will end and that will be it. It is the governement programs and handouts that is forever and will be a burden to the future genenration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, other peoples money can change the way you live, how convenient. :yes:

Interesting, you have no problem with spending others peoples money so long as it is used for destruction and bloodshed? :hmm:

But God forbid we actually try to help US citizens right?

Man, they got you hook, line and sinker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, you have no problem with spending others peoples money so long as it is used for destruction and bloodshed? :hmm:

But God forbid we actually try to help US citizens right?

Man, they got you hook, line and sinker.

Destruction of those who are causing problems in the world, got no problem with it.

The American peopl e will be fine without your promises of subsidies, programs and entitlements. Your spoon feeding generosity that does not come from your own pocket really is not what the American people want. They just want an equal opportunity to be sucessful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Destruction of those who are causing problems in the world, got no problem with it.

The American peopl e will be fine without your promises of subsidies, programs and entitlements. Your spoon feeding generosity that does not come from your own pocket really is not what the American people want. They just want an equal opportunity to be sucessful.

Wrong, polls reveal that for years the vast majority of Americans have wanted decreased military spending and increased social spending.

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong, polls reveal that for years the vast majority of Americans have wanted decreased military spending and increased social spending.

Here you go with your poll again. It's always your last ammo for you know it can't be verified.

The Cold War - Same argument, we reduce military spending and more on social spending. Carter pretty much has done that with a democratic Congress.

We all know what happened.

After the cold war was over - Same call by the Liberals we don't need a big Military anymore for the USSR is gone. Then out of nowhere Saddam rolled into Kuwait.

When will you folks ever learn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here you go with your poll again. It's always your last ammo for you know it can't be verified.

The Cold War - Same argument, we reduce military spending and more on social spending. Carter pretty much has done that with a democratic Congress.

We all know what happened.

After the cold war was over - Same call by the Liberals we don't need a big Military anymore for the USSR is gone. Then out of nowhere Saddam rolled into Kuwait.

When will you folks ever learn?

Saddam never rolled into America though or never threatened the US at anytime during his rule in Iraq. The US only gets involved when they think they can make money which is why they haven't went into Africa to stop the many atrocities there.

As for polls they are more accurate then you think and you can't accept facts that's what it comes down to because you don't even know how they work.

I don't think anyone disagrees that the US needs a military but why does it have to cost so much money, where is government accountability on the spending which goes into the military industrial complex pockets.

The real issue here is that money is not going to the military it is going to corporations who are becoming your military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here you go with your poll again. It's always your last ammo for you know it can't be verified.

The Cold War - Same argument, we reduce military spending and more on social spending. Carter pretty much has done that with a democratic Congress.

We all know what happened.

Generally, scientific polls are a good way to measure the opinion of the electorate on an issue at that particular moment. And the Cold War is over, AROCES. Just let it go.

After the cold war was over - Same call by the Liberals we don't need a big Military anymore for the USSR is gone. Then out of nowhere Saddam rolled into Kuwait.

When will you folks ever learn?

Funny thing about that - George Bush Sr. had already begun massive drawdowns in military numbers, because he recognized - as you apparently do not, and which Gulf War I proved- that you didn't need a conventional military built to fight a global superpower on the plains of Poland when said superpower simply ceases to exist. Seriously, are you arguing that Saddam was a good reason to keep Cold War Era- military spending, especially when he was defeated in 1991 and 2003 without it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, scientific polls are a good way to measure the opinion of the electorate on an issue at that particular moment. And the Cold War is over, AROCES. Just let it go.

You mean how it showed Bush was suppose to win the popular vote and Gore would win the electorate. Then it happened the other way around? So much for your scientific poills.

Of course, let us forget about the cold war for you libs were so wrong about it and now you want to do the same thing all over again..

Funny thing about that - George Bush Sr. had already begun massive drawdowns in military numbers, because he recognized - as you apparently do not, and which Gulf War I proved- that you didn't need a conventional military built to fight a global superpower on the plains of Poland when said superpower simply ceases to exist. Seriously, are you arguing that Saddam was a good reason to keep Cold War Era- military spending, especially when he was defeated in 1991 and 2003 without it?

Nope, overall military strength and prepareness. Which you libs are always against and prefer govt handouts programs instead.

Edited by AROCES
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saddam never rolled into America though or never threatened the US at anytime during his rule in Iraq. The US only gets involved when they think they can make money which is why they haven't went into Africa to stop the many atrocities there.

Were just glad you were not the decision maker then when Saddam took Kuwait, for now we know you would have gone to Aftrica instead.

As for polls they are more accurate then you think and you can't accept facts that's what it comes down to because you don't even know how they work.

OK, then why don't we get rid of elections, and the President. We just take a poll on any decision for the country. :tu:

I don't think anyone disagrees that the US needs a military but why does it have to cost so much money, where is government accountability on the spending which goes into the military industrial complex pockets.

Because the enemy always would want to be ahead or stronger than us, and we won't allow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean how it showed Bush was suppose to win the popular vote and Gore would win the electorate. Then it happened the other way around? So much for your scientific poills.

Those would be "exit polls", which generally are in dispute as to whether they consist of useful polls or not.

Of course, let us forget about the cold war for you libs were so wrong about it and now you want to do the same thing all over again..

Yet, if I recall correctly, literally every war that has been won or lost in the 20th century, not including the half-assed Gulf "War" I, was done so under the leadership of a Democratic President (Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson/John F. Kennedy). Aside for Bush Sr. and his "war" in 1991, the last time a President came to term during an actual American War (Nixon) was the one who cut and ran. In fact, in spite of the saber-rattling by the Republicans on the war issue, they've generally only gone into wars when victory was 100% assured beforehand, like the Gulf War, or Grenada, whereas the Democrats have led through every major war of the past century.

Nope, overall military strength and prepareness. Which you libs are always against and prefer govt handouts programs instead.

I noticed you didn't respond to my point about it being Bush Sr., a Republican President, who started the draw-downs after the end of the Cold War in terms of military force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.