Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

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.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Little-known-fact-Obamas-failed-stimulus-program-cost-more-than-the-Iraq-war-101302919.html#ixzz0xUIDDHjG

[Heracles 417]

War is a black-hole type expenditure, a stimulus is investment in America.

[alienlovechild 75]

War is a black-hole type expenditure, a stimulus is investment in America.

It's a simple guns vs. butter debate. Wars aren't aren't the part on a conventional economic policy. By the same token, the stimulus is worthless to the war effort.

The funny part is people claimed the wars were too expensive and ruining the economy but now very economists blame the current recession on military spending.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I'd rather have the money spent here than elsewhere.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I'd rather we had not spent any of the money at all..... nor taken from the people to begin with...

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I'd rather we had not spent any of the money at all..... nor taken from the people to begin with...

Way too late for that. If it's going to be spent, spend it here.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq.

The U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money, according to a study released on Wednesday.

So far, Congress has given Bush $604 billion for the two wars, with about $412 billion spent in Iraq,

From your 2007 cite

Edited August 24, 2010 by ##########

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

From your 2007 cite

Right. The wars ain't over and will continue to cost hundreds of billions of dollars. That's the cost of the war as opposed what's been spent on that misguided effort to date.

Or are you one of those fuzzy math fellas who trade in their 10 year old car for $2,000.00, pick up a brand new car for $1,000.00 down payment and claim - despite knowing that they still owe huge on that new car - that the new car cost less than the old one?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Right. The wars ain't over and will continue to cost hundreds of billions of dollars. That's the cost of the war as opposed what's been spent on that misguided effort to date.

Or are you one of those fuzzy math fellas who trade in their 10 year old car for $2,000.00, pick up a brand new car for $1,000.00 down payment and claim - despite knowing that they still owe huge on that new car - that the new car cost less than the old one?

????

[Dan J 277]

Are you suggesting that all that the war cost is what was directly authorized by congress to be spent on Iraq?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

????

spent to date ≠ total cost

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The three trillion dollar war

Joseph Stiglitz

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.

The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

The privatization of the military has been an economic disaster and windfall for corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

spent to date ≠ total cost

So, comparing apples to apples, what will be the total cost of the stimulus? That was the point of the original post.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I'd rather we had not spent any of the money at all..... nor taken from the people to begin with...