The Iraq War Cost: 452 Billion Dollars and Counting

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MACDRIVE, Sep 16, 2007.

  1. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #1
    Cost-of-War

    When I hear reports of the accumulated monetary cost of the Iraq war, I often wonder what else could have been done with that money. A totally new way of repairing people's damaged spinal cords through the use of nanotechnology and other medical breakthroughs come to mind. How about yourself, what kinds of things do you think could have been done with that money?
     
  2. G5Unit macrumors 68020

    G5Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Location:
    I'm calling the cops
    #2
    For that kind of money we could have sent jodie foster to another galaxy.
     
  3. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Corvallis, Oregon
    #3
    "But remember, we're deficit spending for this war! So don't think about it as 452 billion dollars that you have to pay. Think of it as 452 TRILLION dollars that your grandchildren will have to pay. And you know what? **** them! They think you smell bad!"

    Jon Stewart, edited for timeliness.
     
  4. MACDRIVE thread starter macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #4
    How does that work? Does the government have a credit card? Who issues them the credit? Seriously, I don't know; I thought that somehow us taxpayers were paying for this war. :confused:
     
  5. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Corvallis, Oregon
    #5
    MACDRIVE:
    Most U.S. government deficit spending is done through the selling of bonds such as U.S. Savings Bonds and Treasury Bills. When people buy bonds from the U.S., they give the government money which the government then gives back to the purchaser with interest later on down the line. Meanwhile, the government uses this money to make up for the budget shortfall.

    There are times when deficit spending by a government is useful, such as when trying to end a recession or lower unemployment. Of course, there are (obviously) long-term consequences since the government then has to budget for repaying the bonds with interest later on down the road.
     
  6. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #6
    Near the end of President Clinton's administration, through good financial management, we had paid down our national debt, and even had a surplus (if you can have a surplus and still be in debt). What he wanted to do was pay down more debt, and put the rest into social security, to bolster those programs. Sound financial management. However, the republican congress thwarted that plan. They saw a huge egg laid by the golden goose. They took the results of President Clinton's sound economic policies, and turned into a massive tax break, mainly for those making > $250,000 per year.

    The republicans squandered the money like pimps and whores. By the time of the first SOU, we were borrowing at record levels. The prosperity we had known, for the previous 8 years, was a distant memory.
     
  7. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #7
    And people still criticize the Democrats for "wasting" money.

    The ignorance of some people is astounding, especially since they would have to completely ignore all reason and fact to keep believing the stuff they believe.
     
  8. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #8
    Worse, when they're forced to get rid of those tax cuts Bush is giving the upper crust, and probably then some, they'll get criticized for daring to raise taxes on honest, hard working Americans to pay for it.

    Lot of money wasted, and it's just getting harder and harder to even try to justify.
     
  9. MACDRIVE thread starter macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #9
    Thanks for the explanation; I'm not sure I understand it, but thanks. :)
     
  10. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #10
    Also important to consider all the not-yet-accounted-for costs, like care of the tremendous number of wounded (that's the biggie), dealing with the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees who will resettle in the US, repair of our badly damaged military, maybe reparations to Iraq or some part of it, etc.
     
  11. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #11
    With that much money, we could have paid Dr. Evil his ransom demands 452,000 times over!


    It's just a figure now....and incomprehensible figure. I don't know what that money could have done, but I'm sure this world would be completely transformed if people put as much money and time into other, larger problems as the US did in Iraq, and in Afghanistan before that.

    The funny thing is that if the US invested $452 Billion towards finding an alternative fuel source, there would be no reason to put attention on the Middle East or Iraq. With $452 billion dollars in research, we could have made oil worthless.
     
  12. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #12
    Crikey. That's a lot of wedge.

    Could have built some bitchin' air craft carriers for that and had something to show for it.

    Oh well, you live you...learn??
     
  13. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #13
    or you could have bought 4.5 million Porsche 911 or giving every human on earth multiple dozens donuts
     
  14. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #14
    While I've no respect for the Republican efforts to buy votes with deficit spending, the Clinton positives are a myth deriving from "cooking the books". If you factor in the twisted reasoning involved in the FICA bookkeeping, there's never been anywhere near a breakeven, much less a surplus. And the interest component of the federal budget rose during that tenure...

    Of this Iraq money, four + years and $452 billion means an average of $100 billion a year, or one-third to one fourth (roughly) of the annual deficits of the last half-dozen years.

    For me, not liking deficit spending at all, then, no, the money hasn't been available for the aforementioned good uses.

    'Rat
     
  15. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #15
    I'd be more interested in recouping the money wasted on the wars on drugs and poverty. When we doing to withdraw our "troops" from those wars and declare them lost?
     
  16. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Corvallis, Oregon
    #16
    "Well, you live and learn. At any rate, you live."
     
  17. MACDRIVE thread starter macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #17
    Porsches and donuts sounds delicious. :)
     
  18. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #18
    MACDRIVE, a burning question: Would Porsche drivers remove their driving gloves in order to eat the donuts?

    More: Would they worry about staining their custom silver jackets? And, could they see the donuts through their sunglasses?

    :D, 'Rat
     
  19. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #19
    i think we might be able to squeeze in an extra pair of gloves and suit for every single one of the porsches in those 452 billions which they can use just for eating donuts
     
  20. kainjow Moderator emeritus

    kainjow

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2000
    #20
    Dang it, I want donuts now. I'm about to go to the store and buy some :cool:
     
  21. Cursor macrumors 6502

    Cursor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #21
    Unfortunately, China was gobbling up Treasury Bonds, which was a huge help to pay for a lot of our bills. But, when they decide to cash them in, we'll be in a heap of trouble. Think of the depression x 10 :eek:.
     
  22. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #22
    it is funny how people forget that little fact. The US government spends 300-400billion a year that they do not have and have been doing so long before the war with Iraq and they seem to think it is all because of the war.....

    Really people the US government has been spending more than it brought in for over 200 years now and people still find it surprising.
     
  23. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #23
    Sorry Rat, but I am going to take Greenspan's opinion over yours. Do a little research without the anti Clinton predisposition.
     
  24. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    Which administration was more fiscally prudent?

    Gotta factor in interest and all the indirect costs too. Don't forget those in your calculations...

    Would you advocate not accepting any line of credit as a business owner?
     
  25. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #25
    While I'm certainly no Clinton apologist, I think this commonly-held far-right belief lacks a lot of merit. A cursory examination of information made available by the US Government Census argues strongly in favour of Clinton's policies vs. the current government. It also ignores the common link between Reagan and Clinton administration's chairman of the federal reserve.

    There may have been a certain amount of embellishment and books may or may not have been on the barbecue -- their covers plump with the juicy contents made tender and savoury by the sweet caress of the open flame -- but that's true of any administration. I think it's pretty fantastical to claim anything contrary to the idea that the Clinton administration was a more positive influence on the economy than the current administration.
     

Share This Page