CBO: Eight years of Iraq War cost less than stimulus act...

[posty]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/30...t-stimulus-act/

 

As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009.

 

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.

 

The U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2010 is expected to be $1.3 trillion, according to CBO. That compares to a 2007 deficit of $160.7 billion and a 2008 deficit of $458.6 billion, according to data provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

 

In 2007 and 2008, the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product was 1.2 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively.

 

"Relative to the size of the economy, this year's deficit is expected to be the second largest shortfall in the past 65 years; 9.1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), exceeded only by last year's deficit of 9.9 percent of GDP," CBO wrote.

 

The CBO figures show that the most expensive year of the Iraq war was in 2008, the year when the surge proposed by Gen. David Petraeus and approved by President Bush was in full swing and the turning point in the war. The total cost of Iraq operations in 2008 was $140 billion. In 2007, the cost of Iraq operations was $124 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.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Somehow I thing the ROI of spending money in our own economy just might be a wee bit better than dumping pallet loads of cash in the middle of the desert.

[SEC=UGA]

Bush Lied, People Died!!!

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Bush Lied, People Died!!!

 

We know where the WMDs are. They are somewhere N, S, E, and W of Baghdad.

[SEC=UGA]

We know where the WMDs are. They are somewhere N, S, E, and W of Baghdad.

 

West, in the hands of those Zionist instigators!!!

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know. ”

—United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

 

(Rummy should have stuck with being the sidekick on The Greatest American Hero.)

[gbpfan1231]

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know. ”

—United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

 

(Rummy should have stuck with being the sidekick on The Greatest American Hero.)

I will see your Rumsfeld and raise you a Pelosi.

[moneymakers]

Repost

 

The sheep dont care.

please dont mess with hope and change.

 

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

[bpwallace49]

I wonder how the lives lost figure into that equation?

 

Just think how much better our economy would have been if we didnt pour money into Iraq instead of our own country . . .

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

I wonder how the lives lost figure into that equation?

 

Just think how much better our economy would have been if we didnt pour money into Iraq instead of our own country . . .

 

C'mon man, MUSHROOM CLOUDS!

[Azazello1313]

this strikes me as a dumb comparison for either side.

[evil_gop_liars]

A $40 million prison sits in the desert north of Baghdad, empty. A $165 million children's hospital goes unused in the south. A $100 million waste water treatment system in Fallujah has cost three times more than projected, yet sewage still runs through the streets.

 

As the U.S. draws down in Iraq, it is leaving behind hundreds of abandoned or incomplete projects. More than $5 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds has been wasted on these projects - more than 10 percent of the $53.7 billion the US has spent on reconstruction in Iraq,

 

[bpwallace49]

Is th epoint of this to point out how much money was wasted on the war in Iraq, or to point out how much money we spent on the stimulus?

 

Either way we spent a hell of a lot of money for very little measurable [/b]return in both cases.

[SEC=UGA]

I wonder how the lives lost figure into that equation?

 

Just think how much better our economy would have been if we didnt pour money into Iraq instead of our own country . . .

 

If we didn't have the Iraq war how many people would currently be unemployed who have provided goods and services to the war effort?

[bpwallace49]

If we didn't have the Iraq war how many people would currently be unemployed who have provided goods and services to the war effort?

 

Maybe they would be used in Afghanistan where the real war was playing "where in the world is Osama Bin Laden"?

[SEC=UGA]

"where in the world is Osama Bin Laden"?

 

Trust me, you don't want to know, because if you did, you'd be dead already.

[bpwallace49]

Trust me, you don't want to know, because if you did, you'd be dead already.

 

m00slim terrorist

[SEC=UGA]

m00slim terrorist

 

No, I'm just trying to keep the balance of power the way it is for a little while... You'll know when someone changes their mind, you'll know.

[WaterMan]

Somehow I thing the ROI of spending money in our own economy just might be a wee bit better than dumping pallet loads of cash in the middle of the desert.

 

Nice to see one President trying to help America.

[detlef]

Quick question.

 

Considering that, during the entirety of the war under Dubya, I recall the cost of the war was continually being pushed off and not exactly accounted for in each year's budget. Why anyone accepted this, I don't know. At any rate, is there any chance that the author of this article is using those numbers for each year or have we actually stopped with the creative accounting and started counting all the money that has been spent in Iraq?

 

Question #2:

 

What about the portion of the stimulus package passed by Bush. Guys like Beck have done a fine job of convincing everyone that this entire deal is Obama's and conveniently forget that the first, very large batch of money pushed out there was under Dubya's watch.

 

Regardless, and this is not an endorsement of Obama's stimulus plan, I do side with others here in saying that, if you're going to spend America's money, I would sort of rather it get spent on America.

[Azazello1313]

Quick question.

 

Considering that, during the entirety of the war under Dubya, I recall the cost of the war was continually being pushed off and not exactly accounted for in each year's budget. Why anyone accepted this, I don't know. At any rate, is there any chance that the author of this article is using those numbers for each year or have we actually stopped with the creative accounting and started counting all the money that has been spent in Iraq?

 

what you're thinking about is the fact that the war costs were largely not included when the president offered his annual proposed budget. people rightly criticized this as disingenuously hiding the war costs to make your proposed deficit look small than it actually was. this practice of hiding war costs in "supplementals", it's worth pointing out, has continued unabated under obama.

 

but to answer your question, the estimates being referred to here INCLUDE all of those supplementals, and everything else that's been spent on the iraq war.

 

Question #2:

 

What about the portion of the stimulus package passed by Bush. Guys like Beck have done a fine job of convincing everyone that this entire deal is Obama's and conveniently forget that the first, very large batch of money pushed out there was under Dubya's watch.

 

Regardless, and this is not an endorsement of Obama's stimulus plan, I do side with others here in saying that, if you're going to spend America's money, I would sort of rather it get spent on America.

 

bush had nothing to do with the ~$800 ARRA or "stimulus" bill. bush did push for and sign TARP, which was another hugh chunk of change.

[bpwallace49]

bush did push for and sign TARP, which was another hugh chunk of change.

 

And didnt TARP start turning a profit with the monies being paid back plus interest?

[Azazello1313]

And didnt TARP start turning a profit with the monies being paid back plus interest?

 

nah, the taxpayer is still in the hole, but by less than $100 billion at this point. it's mostly GM and AIG still outstanding. graphic

[Furd]

this strikes me as a dumb comparison for either side.

 

 

This.

[westvirginia]

And didnt TARP start turning a profit with the monies being paid back plus interest?

 

So shrub's stimulus TARP made money and obamessiah's isn't? Great point!