watch my post disappear

[moneymakers]

Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war

By: Mark Tapscott

Editorial Page Editor

08/23/10 11:32 AM EDT

Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days ahead from Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented spending excesses.

 

The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's economic policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven points out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph Stiglitz, and The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.

 

The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the war. Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as Hoven notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure in the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003, Hoven provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual deficit attributable to the conflict:

 

 

 

But there is much more to be said of this data and Hoven does an admirable job of summarizing the highlights of such an analysis:

 

* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.

 

* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.

 

* 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.)

 

Just some handy facts to recall during coming weeks as Obama and his congressional Democratic buddies get more desperate to put the blame for their spending policies on Bush and the war in Iraq. For more from Hoven, go here

 

 

 

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/...l#ixzz0xTmngUnP

 

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/...-101302919.html

[tazinib1]

4,416

[HowboutthemCowboys]

4,416

[tosberg34]

4,416

 

58,193

[bushwacked]

 

[cre8tiff]

 

 

 

[Perchoutofwater]

I have to ask, how does one keep the sand out of their ears and nose when their head is so firmly planted in it?

[rattsass]

My post disappears when I get in really cold water.

[Kid Cid]

[whomper]

 

 

 

 

 

 

...

[bushwacked]

...

 

[moneymakers]

 

 

 

Libby cant comment on the truth.

 

just wait till we all get ombataxed to pay for his payoff of election.

[wiegie]

Moneymakers, do the costs you cite include the net present value of all future costs associated with the soldiers injured in the war who will require medical treatment for the rest of their lives?

[moneymakers]

Nope and nor does the stimulus money count on all the booze and caviar that Obama buddies bought.

[SEC=UGA]

Moneymakers, do the costs you cite include the net present value of all future costs associated with the soldiers injured in the war who will require medical treatment for the rest of their lives?

 

I can post that. I'll also post the extensive positive economic effect that this war has had on the reporting/news, weapons, garment/textile, food, oil, shipping, airline, steel, automobile, plastics, alloys, aluminum, lead, mining, leather, parcel, concrete, glass, and paper/wood industries (among others) and the fact that it has saved or created more jobs per dollar than the stimulus...

[Scooby's Hubby]

Politicians are so worried about November that they forgot about real help, long-term help. For Example: Why not come up with a long-term energy policy that quits dumping our money into other countries and keeps it here? Where are the green jobs? Where are the long term alternatives? The consumer cannot spend his way out of this recession. The government cannot spend their way out of it. This crisis needs real long-term solutions, where are our politicians when we need their smarts? Worried about November. BS

[rattsass]

I can post that. I'll also post the extensive positive economic effect that this war has had on the reporting/news, weapons, garment/textile, food, oil, shipping, airline, steel, automobile, plastics, alloys, aluminum, lead, mining, leather, parcel, concrete, glass, and paper/wood industries (among others) and the fact that it has saved or created more jobs per dollar than the stimulus...

War is profitable. Now if we could just figure out a way to make socialism pay.

[Kid Cid]

The military/industrial complex continues to profit on the death of young American citizens. All it does it help itself, it is not a great stimulator of the economy.

[whomper]

...

 

 

 

 

© mcboog

[The Irish Doggy]

Bingo! I have Bingo!

[WaterMan]

I can post that. I'll also post the extensive positive economic effect that this war has had on the reporting/news, weapons, garment/textile, food, oil, shipping, airline, steel, automobile, plastics, alloys, aluminum, lead, mining, leather, parcel, concrete, glass, and paper/wood industries (among others) and the fact that it has saved or created more jobs per dollar than the stimulus...

 

Except a bad effect on our money is China calling for the dollar to be removed as the world standard because we owe them so much of it.