It is currently Sat May 19, 2012 3:10 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Politics » War and Terrorism

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Kizzume
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:25 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:14 pm
Posts: 5368
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Highscores: 1

Kizzume
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/13/ ... index.html

Quote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The total economic impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated at $1.6 trillion by 2009, a congressional committee said in a report released Tuesday.

SNIP

That is nearly double the $804 billion in direct war costs the White House requested so far from Congress, the Democratic-led Joint Economic Committee said.

The committee estimated $1.3 trillion in war costs by the end of 2008 for Iraq, and the remainder for Afghanistan.

The total war costs could grow to $3.5 trillion by 2017, the committee estimated.

SNIP

"For every dollar we spend directly in Iraq, we're going to pay another dollar for the indirect, but immediate, costs of the war," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, said. "We of the baby boom generation and our children and grandchildren will be paying for this war for a very long time to come."

"We cannot afford this war -- $12 billion dollars a month?" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said. "We just can't. We can't continue."


Doesn't this seem like the most expensive mistake ever?
Top
 Profile  
 
debateman
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:55 am
Posts: 364
Location: New Mexico
Well... Social Security comes to mind. As does a HUGE nuclear stockpile (thanks Reagan).

_________________
And there is a return...
Top
 Profile  
 
jq
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:17 pm
Posts: 1413
Quote:
Well... Social Security comes to mind. As does a HUGE nuclear stockpile (thanks Reagan).
Yeah this sucks. What sucks worse is that the candidates running for political office, especially on the right, keep talking about "liberal pork barrel spending, like health care" as if they have any right to talk about fiscal responsiblity when they voted for Bush twice and approved of his war. Talk about hypocrisy!



Kizzume said:
Doesn't this seem like the most expensive mistake ever?

On the bright side our money just keeps inflating and losing it's value, so in reality, we can argue that we aren't losing $1.6 trillion, but by the time our money is done inflating, it will be the equivalent of like 400,000,000 euros. Obviously, I am being sarcastic. Inflation sucks, and so does this fiscal nightmare.
Top
 Profile  
 
chuq
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:48 am
Posts: 135
Location: Gulf South
Repubs are demanding a retraction of the report.


WASHINGTON (AFP) - Republican lawmakers on Wednesday demanded the retraction of a Democratic party report which warned that the costs of the Iraq and Afghan wars could reach 3.5 trillion dollars.

They warned the survey by Democratic staffers on Congress's Joint Economic Committee (JEC) was riddled with errors and should not be allowed to stand.

"In the rush to score political points, apparently no one bothered to fact check the report," said Senator Sam Brownback and Representative Jim Saxton, top Republicans on the committee, in a statement.


LINK

_________________
'Politics' is made up of two words, 'poli,' which is Greek for 'many,' and 'tics,' which are blood-sucking insects.
- Gore Vidal
Top
 Profile  
 
Kizzume
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:28 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:14 pm
Posts: 5368
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Highscores: 1

Kizzume
Here's a key quote from that article
Quote:
Hidden outlays would also inflate the price to the 3.5 trillion dollar mark by 2017, they warned, basing the figure on the cost of treating wounded veterans, the Iraq war's impact on oil prices and other economic factors.


I sure wish I knew what those other economic factors were.
Top
 Profile  
 
jq
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:17 pm
Posts: 1413
Quote:
Here's a key quote from that article
Quote:
Hidden outlays would also inflate the price to the 3.5 trillion dollar mark by 2017, they warned, basing the figure on the cost of treating wounded veterans, the Iraq war's impact on oil prices and other economic factors.


I sure wish I knew what those other economic factors were.



lol, no kidding.
Top
 Profile  
 
redstaterebel
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 128
Hey Kizz - nice site. Thanks for letting me join.

Anyway - this report was by a handful of democrats looking to make the news.

I'm wondering what is the point of this "estimate"?

Is the point to finally use their congressional budget authority to shut it down? OR - just to stir the pot for the upcoming election year.

Anyone know what their point is?
Top
 Profile  
 
jq
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:17 pm
Posts: 1413
Quote:
Hey Kizz - nice site. Thanks for letting me join.

Anyway - this report was by a handful of democrats looking to make the news.

I'm wondering what is the point of this "estimate"?

Is the point to finally use their congressional budget authority to shut it down? OR - just to stir the pot for the upcoming election year.

Anyone know what their point is?



I will agree that the motivation was probably sensationalist driven. Lets face it, the election season is going to get a whole lot nastier! However, having said that, and knowing how much we have already spent in Iraq, does it really sound that far fetched to you RSR? If I have my numbers correctly, we are already up to like 880 billion dollars in Iraq, right? I realize 1.6 is almost double that, but still, I think we should be terrified by the numbers we already have, partisanship aside.
Top
 Profile  
 
Kizzume
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:14 pm
Posts: 5368
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Highscores: 1

Kizzume
I'll also agree that the motivation for the numbers are partisan and sensationalist, and I also agree that we should still be concerned about the numbers that have already accrued.

But their point is a scare tactic. It seems to work well.
Top
 Profile  
 
Kizzume
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:14 pm
Posts: 5368
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Highscores: 1

Kizzume
Quote:
Here's a key quote from that article
Quote:
Hidden outlays would also inflate the price to the 3.5 trillion dollar mark by 2017, they warned, basing the figure on the cost of treating wounded veterans, the Iraq war's impact on oil prices and other economic factors.


I sure wish I knew what those other economic factors were.


National debt also plays a part. And we know that ours is soaring.
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » Politics » War and Terrorism

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

News News Site map Site map SitemapIndex SitemapIndex RSS Feed RSS Feed Channel list Channel list

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

phpBB SEO