Nobel Prize Economist Puts Long Term Costs of Iraq War at $7 Trillion (Merged) (1 Viewer)

[blackadder]

Joseph Stiglitz. This is the guy who released his own estimate of the war's costs a few years ago.

That estimate has proven accurate to this point, much more so than the smoke and mirror numbers of the government.

Stiglitz has refined and updated the estimate. He now pegs the immediate costs at more than $3 trillion and the longer term number with all follow on costs included at $7 trillion:

http://www.buffalonews.com/nationalworld/national/story/286943.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7ZASjKUp0A

Compare and contrast to the lies floated about "self-financing" occupation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uFjr0Vr1ZY

$7 Trillion that is not available for Social Security, for infrastructure, for health care or to be left in your pocket and invested by your household...

To put that in perspective, our annual GDP is about $13 trillion and out National Debt is about to hit $10 trillion.

"Pretty soon you'll be talking about real money."

Interestingly the study notes that that the real money burden doesn't start until many years from now: “The peak expenditures are way out,” he said, noting that the peak expenditures for World War II veterans came in 1993.

 

[RebSaint]

That's one hell of a subsidy for the oil companies. And believe me, that's all it is. Great. We'll have $2.00 gallon gas as opposed to $3.00, unless all hell breaks loose in Iraq then it's $5.00 a gallon.

Fooobar.

And the adminstration continues to LIE about Iraq and 9-11

“People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can’t even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11,” said White House spokesman Tony Fratto, conceding that the costs of the war on terrorism are high while questioning the premise of Stiglitz’s research."

Disgusting.

 

[blackadder]

“People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can’t even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11,” said White House spokesman Tony Fratto, conceding that the costs of the war on terrorism are high while questioning the premise of Stiglitz’s research."

Actually you can come close to a cost of 9/11, and you can add to it the cost of the policy mistakes made in its name.

As it was we were not "doing nothing" we went to Afghanistan, attackend and broke up the group responsible for 9/11 and then inexplicably let the mastermind escape to sanctuary in Pakistan.

We attacked the perpatrators and addressed the issue. That's not "doing nothing."

Iraq had nothing to do with it. It's a boondoggle tacked on and justified by 9/11. Thankfully for the government most voters can't even locate Iraq on the map, let alone work out that they didn't have a connection to 9/11.

 

[dapperdan]

Actually you can come close to a cost of 9/11, and you can add to it the cost of the policy mistakes made in its name.

As it was we were not "doing nothing" we went to Afghanistan, attackend and broke up the group responsible for 9/11 and then inexplicably let the mastermind escape to sanctuary in Pakistan.

We attacked the perpatrators and addressed the issue. That's not "doing nothing."

Iraq had nothing to do with it. It's a boondoggle tacked on and justified by 9/11. Thankfully for the government most voters can't even locate Iraq on the map, let alone work out that they didn't have a connection to 9/11.

If I recall the operation in Afghanistan, we essentially outsourced the boots on the ground to the IRG. On the one hand, you've got the Baer account, asking for backup that was denied when we had AQ pinned down in the crosshairs, and you've got accounts of the IRG giving a pass to AQ allowing them to move to Pakistan. My memory's probably not as good as it should be, so feel free to correct.

 

[blackadder]

If I recall the operation in Afghanistan, we essentially outsourced the boots on the ground to the IRG. On the one hand, you've got the Baer account, asking for backup that was denied when we had AQ pinned down in the crosshairs, and you've got accounts of the IRG giving a pass to AQ allowing them to move to Pakistan. My memory's probably not as good as it should be, so feel free to correct.

No, that's about right. I didn't say we did it right, I said we did it.

Now, if the planners knew that they were expected to follow up Afghanistan with an all out invasion of Iraq in another year and that impacted the way Afghanistan was done, forcing "outsourcing" and "on the cheap" tactics that held back direct particiaption of significant numbers pf US troops for the Iraq operation, that adds another aspect to the costs of the Iraq blunder.

 

[champ76]

Didn't Al Gore win the Nobel Prize? :dunno: Just sayin.

 

[RebSaint]

Didn't Al Gore win the Nobel Prize? :dunno: Just sayin.

Yeah, I get your point, but are the predictions wrong? We don't know. Dapperdan and I had a running debate here--I've seen conservative estimates around $500 million dollars thusfar. Other more "biased" or anti-war sources (Democratic party Congressional Commission) have the price tag around 1.3 trillion dollars when taking into account care for the wounded soldiers, disability, etc.

There's been a discussion to construct a massive base which rivals the pentagon. We've had McCain even suggest a 100 year commitment, which if elected and congress continues to fund it, at least extends the occupation for at least 8 more years. Do the math.

Another 8 years is at the very LEAST nearly 2 trillion dollars. A 10-20 year plus commitment with troops, bases, and further help for infastructure, etc. surely will sniff 5 trillion dollars. 30 years? Who knows.

The problem with these predictions are obviously based on predicting what level of commitment the United States will have in Iraq for the next 10 years at least, but we do know that there are plenty of polticians on both sides of the aisle and specifically McCain who want to continue handing a blank check with a completely open-ended commitment.

 

[CitySaint]

Good Times!

Any time you meet a payment. - Good Times!
Any time you need a friend. - Good Times!
Any time you’re out from under.
Not getting hassled, not getting hustled.
Keepin’ your head above water,
Making a wave when you can.

Temporary lay offs. - Good Times!
Easy credit rip offs. - Good Times!
Scratchin’ and surviving. - Good Times!
Hangin in a chow line - Good Times!
Ain’t we lucky we got ‘em - Good Times!

 

[RABDOG]

Good Times!

Any time you meet a payment. - Good Times!
Any time you need a friend. - Good Times!
Any time you’re out from under.
Not getting hassled, not getting hustled.
Keepin’ your head above water,
Making a wave when you can.

Temporary lay offs. - Good Times!
Easy credit rip offs. - Good Times!
Scratchin’ and surviving. - Good Times!
Hangin in a chow line - Good Times!
Ain’t we lucky we got ‘em - Good Times!

...dang you got all but one of the lines right...it's..."making a way when you can"....lol

 

[bclemms]

Iraq war hits U.S. economy: Nobel winner

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Iraq war has contributed to the U.S. economic slowdown and is impeding an economic recovery, Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says.

ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, the U.S. government is severely underestimating the cost of the war, Stiglitz and co-author Linda Bilmes write in their book, "The Three Trillion Dollar War" (W.W. Norton), due to be published on Monday.

The nearly 5-year-old war, once billed as virtually paying for itself through increased Iraqi oil exports, has cost the U.S. Treasury $845 billion directly.

"It used to be thought that wars are good for the economy. No economist really believes that anymore," Stiglitz said in an interview.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/usa_economy_iraq_dc;_ylt=AhA5macAJPYGxj8uk50OdYUDW7oF

To illustrate how the money could be spent elsewhere, Bilmes cited the annual U.S. budget for autism research -- $108 million -- which is spent every four hours in Iraq. A trillion dollars could have hired 15 million additional public school teachers for a year or provided 43 million students with four-year scholarships to public universities, the book says.

 

[blackadder]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Iraq war has contributed to the U.S. economic slowdown and is impeding an economic recovery, Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says.

ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, the U.S. government is severely underestimating the cost of the war, Stiglitz and co-author Linda Bilmes write in their book, "The Three Trillion Dollar War" (W.W. Norton), due to be published on Monday.

The nearly 5-year-old war, once billed as virtually paying for itself through increased Iraqi oil exports, has cost the U.S. Treasury $845 billion directly.

"It used to be thought that wars are good for the economy. No economist really believes that anymore," Stiglitz said in an interview.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/usa_economy_iraq_dc;_ylt=AhA5macAJPYGxj8uk50OdYUDW7oF

It's not just the opportunity cost.

Going into Iraq and putting a standing army in the Middle East has increased geopolitical uncertainty, which has helped push the price of oil up, which in turn has slowed the economy.

Our Middle East policies have actually added a significant premium to the price of oil, another instance of the "law of unintended consequences."