So far, the math adds up to a half trillion over 10 years or so, including lifetime care for soldiers who are surviving thanks to improved armor. Author just has to account for another 1.5 trillion. Maybe he is projecting into to the year 2100? Or maybe he is bogus.
But the economists' costings went much further than the economic value of lives lost. They factored in items such as the higher oil prices which could partly be attributed to the war. They also calculated the effect if a proportion of the money spent on the Iraq war was allocated to other causes. These factors could add tens of billions of dollars.Or the could add up to minus hundreds of billions of dollars.
Like our president says about polls: Economists' predictions say what you want them to say.
I can play this game better:
Without the war, Saddam would control the UN causing massive international turmoil, funnel billions of dollars and weapons to terrorists and dictators, create havoc in South America; the Middle East would explode in factional wars three times in the next decade (costing hundreds of thousands of lives), and disrupting oil supplies. Western economies would strain against dramatically increased terrorism and uncertain energy markets.
Factoring in the cost of human lives, and future economic losses, the cost of the War in Iraq is:
-$3,000,000,000,000.
The point being:
Ask the learned economists what would be the cost without the war.
1/2 a trillion...boy, that's lots better.
I'm smelling ozone.
IBTZ???
Maybe these two geniuses can tell us how much the war on poverty quagmire has cost Americans over the last 40 years.