Posted on 01/07/2006 6:48:17 PM PST by shuntos
The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert.
The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the war.
The report came during one of the most deadly periods in Iraq since the invasion, with the US military yesterday revising upwards to 11 the number of its troops killed during a wave of insurgent attacks on Thursday. More than 130 civilians were also killed when suicide bombers struck Shia pilgrims in Karbala and a police recruiting station in Ramadi.
The paper on the real cost of the war, written by Joseph Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor who won the Nobel prize for economics in 2001, and Linda Bilmes, a Harvard budget expert, is likely to add to the pressure on the White House on the war. It also followed the revelation this week that the White House had scaled back ambitions to rebuild Iraq and did not intend to seek funds for reconstruction.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Until you give a direct answer to the question posed by jennyjenny,
"So, long time lurker who decided on this article for your first post....what's your take on it?"
Your nothing but a Poser.
Not only don't you know FR shorthand/slang, you also appear to like Jimmy Carter and junk articles from THE GUARDIAN. Yet, you claim to be a "long time lurker" here and expect us to swallow that claptrap as whole cloth. WHY ?
Are you against continuing the exercise in Iraq because it is too expensive to the Treasury per the beans counted, including the speculative beans? Or are you in favor of cut and run, and just found a lagniappe, to throw into the water to the Freeper sharks as chum to watch them squirm and thrash for your entertainment? Just curious.
ROTFLOL!
Maybe you're not a troll, just a liberal college student!
You just listed the trifecta of intolerance.
I mean, God forbid, you write anything "politically incorrect"!
Longtime reader indeed...
The war's direct cost in money terms was $4 trillion (in then-current dollars). In 1950, Secretary of the Army Gordon Gray said that the ultimate monetary cost of a war is four times the direct cost. In America, the fiscal effects were immense. The price tag, in then-current terms, was $350 billion. Virtually all taxes were raised. It was World War II that made the income tax the mass tax that it is today. Five million people were added to the tax rolls during the war.
No need for you to be ZOTTED...you wont last here another hour.
Robert Aumann did so not say that.
does anyone have a pool going on how long it does last?
You all make a beautiful family (meaning: your profile).
Yep, she's a girl. :-)
You're doing quite well!
"I am disappointed that such a great chunk of funds has been shoveled to such a dubious cause..."
Just outed ourselves, did we, now?
Yes, if you're a liberal then by all means share with us. We are a global village here.
We won't judge you.
DUBIOUS CAUSE?
Explain what is DUBIOUS about the War on Terror, and then please explain what id NOT DUBIOUS about EL GAURDIAN and any NOBEL PRIZE?
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
Thank you! I am VERY blessed......Indeed~!
You got it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.