Entire Iraq War Costs Less than Stimulus

[BigRob]

Since we often hear that the Iraq War bankrupt the country, I thought this story was pretty interesting.

According to CBO numbers in its Budget and Economic Outlook published this month, the cost of Operation Iraqi Freedom was $709 billion for military and related activities, including training of Iraqi forces and diplomatic operations.

The projected cost of the stimulus, which passed in February 2009, and is expected to have a shelf life of two years, was $862 billion.

According to an analysis by the American Thinker's Randall Hoven, the cost of the Iraq war from 2003-2008 -- when Bush was in office -- was $20 billion less than the cost of education spending and less than a quarter of the cost of Medicare spending during that same period.

Here are a few other points from another article:

* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.

* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.

* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.

* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).

* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)

 

[Pandora]

I read about that the other day, seems amazing that the people who complained about the cost of the war defend the cost of the stimulus bill.

 

[BigRob]

I read about that the other day, seems amazing that the people who complained about the cost of the war defend the cost of the stimulus bill.

Especially since under the whole Keynesian idea, war spending is really just government spending, and should therefore have the same multiplier effect that the "stimulus" should.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Especially since under the whole Keynesian idea, war spending is really just government spending, and should therefore have the same multiplier effect that the "stimulus" should.

Again you keep assuming that we all buy that Keynesian idea...2nd...how much of that spending went into Iraq...Not the US...Do you realy think building a building in Iraq would have the same Effect as one in the US? Does the cost of building a new bridge in the US...create the same stim and jobs as a Cruise Missile? Millions spend on Fuel for tanks and Jets...creates same as increasing the funding for the states so they can pay teachers?

 

[Pandora]

Especially since under the whole Keynesian idea, war spending is really just government spending, and should therefore have the same multiplier effect that the "stimulus" should.

They knew that the stimulus would not actually stimulate, it was a give away to all those who loyally supported obama and the "stash" left is meant to do same right before obama's next election.

Cynical of me to say, I know but I do think its true.

 

[BigRob]

Again you keep assuming that we all buy that Keynesian idea...

Well, stimulus spending is a Keynesian idea... so if you support it, you support Keynesian economics.

2nd...how much of that spending went into Iraq...Not the US...Do you realy think building a building in Iraq would have the same Effect as one in the US?

Since you have stated you have been to college, I will ask you this... did you ever take Econ 101? Even if we put every single dollar of that money solely into Iraq, what options are then available to the Iraqis who are now holding those dollars? Any option you choose, the dollars ultimately end up back in the US, unless you just burn them, or otherwise take them out of circulation, which they have not done. Even if they did however, if just makes what is left in circulation more valuable.

Does the cost of building a new bridge in the US...create the same stim and jobs as a Cruise Missile?

Yes.

Millions spend on Fuel for tanks and Jets...creates same as increasing the funding for the states so they can pay teachers?

Uh.. yes. Just because the people building the tanks get their job "saved" instead of a teacher does not mean it was any less valuable in terms of "stimulus."

 

[GenSeneca]

Well, stimulus spending is a Keynesian idea... so if you support it, you support Keynesian economics.

He probably also thinks that "trade deficits" are a bad thing... Most Americans have been conditioned to believe such falsehoods in support of Keynesian economics.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

He probably also thinks that "trade deficits" are a bad thing... Most Americans have been conditioned to believe such falsehoods in support of Keynesian economics.

you probably should stick to trying to debate what people actually say, rather then just deciding...We could set up a thread for you to just debate the straw man if you wish...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Well, stimulus spending is a Keynesian idea... so if you support it, you support Keynesian economics.



Since you have stated you have been to college, I will ask you this... did you ever take Econ 101? Even if we put every single dollar of that money solely into Iraq, what options are then available to the Iraqis who are now holding those dollars? Any option you choose, the dollars ultimately end up back in the US, unless you just burn them, or otherwise take them out of circulation, which they have not done. Even if they did however, if just makes what is left in circulation more valuable.



Yes.



Uh.. yes. Just because the people building the tanks get their job "saved" instead of a teacher does not mean it was any less valuable in terms of "stimulus."

I would suggest your taking a complicated Econ idea...and trying to make it as simple and devoid of nuance as to make it fit your idea....I don't think that anyone would suggest building a bridge in Iraq...is the same about of Stimulus to the US econ..as a bridge in the US...(also we get the added fact that our infrastructure is improved ) There bridges are blow up by our bombs...ours fall into the river due to lack of maintenance and poor inspection...

you can debate all you want if Keynesian Econ would agree with you...does not matter to me...I don't agree with it...So if you wish to debate that, find someone who does...I can tell you right now...I don't know anyone that would tell you spending money in Iraq...would Stimulate the US Econ just as much as spending in in the US.

 

[BigRob]

I would suggest your taking a complicated Econ idea...and trying to make it as simple and devoid of nuance as to make it fit your idea....

In what way?

I don't think that anyone would suggest building a bridge in Iraq...is the same about of Stimulus to the US econ..as a bridge in the US...(also we get the added fact that our infrastructure is improved )

In terms of dollar for dollar "stimulus", they would ultimately be equal, in a long term sense. Ultimately, American dollars in Iraq will come back to the US in the form of investment. That is just how it is. If you have dollars, you have a pretty limited set of options that you can pursue with them, all of which (short of burning them or taking them out of circulation) cause them to end up back in the US in the form of investment.

There bridges are blow up by our bombs...ours fall into the river due to lack of maintenance and poor inspection...

Sounds like we get a "double stimulus" then. Building a bridge to blow it up. Sounds like some of the "stimulus" programs of the Great Depression when people were paid to move bricks to one side of the street, then another crew moved them back. We are told that stimulated the economy.

you can debate all you want if Keynesian Econ would agree with you...does not matter to me...I don't agree with it...

Do you support the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act? If the answer if yes, then you support Keynesian ideas, no matter how you deny it.

So if you wish to debate that, find someone who does...I can tell you right now...I don't know anyone that would tell you spending money in Iraq...would Stimulate the US Econ just as much as spending in in the US.

Imagine you are an Iraqi citizen and have a $100 bill. Tell me what you can do with it.

 

[GenSeneca]

you probably should stick to trying to debate what people actually say

Very well, what is your position on trade deficits?

And since you both support stimulus spending but claim not to support Keynesian economics, perhaps you would be so good as to tell us what it is about Keynesian econ you don't like and what system of econ you do support.

 

[Gipper]

IMO the problem is not the cost, but the outcome. Though I would add libs do not care about the cost of welfare programs. They just want more money spent on them year after year. This is why they hate money spent on the military. They want that money spent on enslaving more Americans.

Many so called experts make valid arguments which predict total failure in Iraq in the long run. Their argument is basically Saddam was a Sunni. He brutally ruled a nation of predominately Shi'a Muslims. Now if the Shi'a get control of the country they are likely to align with Iran, which just so happens to be ruled by Shi'a dictators. Iran is about 90% Shi'a.

So, if the USA pulls out, the theory goes Iran will take control and become emboldened. They will continue to cause problems in the ME and throughout the world.

If this comes about, we have wasted a lot of lives and money to liberate a nation from one dictator only to give it to another dictator.

 

[Phoenix68]

Entire Iraq War Costs Less than Stimulus​

.

.
Yeah....sure....great idea....
.

.

.

​