Cost of Iraq War Compared to Other US Wars (vanity)

07/09/07 | self (vanity)

[Sherman Logan]

 

 

Cost of US Wars Compared to Population, GDP and Federal Expenditures
War	US Population	GDP	Nominal War Cost	Real War Cost	War Cost as % of GDP	Total  Federal Expenditures	War Cost as % of Total Federal Expenditures	Total Federal Expenditures as % of GDP
War of 1812	8	1342	.09	1.2	.09
Mexican	20	1880	.07	0.7	.04
WBTS	30	2606	5.2	44.4	1.7	13.8	197.8	.53
Spanish-American	75	4943	0.4	6.3	.13	12.1	52.1	.24
WWI	103	5910	26	196.7	3.33	159.9	123.01	2.71
WWII	140	13483	288	2,092	15.52	876.8	238.6	6.51
Korea	152	12271	54	264	2.15	435.5	60.6	3.55
Vietnam	205	19614	111	346.7	1.77	944.6	36.7	4.82
Iraq	301	38232	405	405	1.06	2213.7	18.3	5.76

 

US Population is expressed in millions for the year the war ended.

GDP is expressed in year 2000 dollars for the year the war ended. Conversion rates are considerably less meaningful for years prior to 1900.

Nominal War Cost is expressed in (billion) dollars of the year the war ended.  This is not always the year war expenditure was highest, notably for WWI, when expenditures were much higher in 1919 than 1918.   It is the total cost of that war for all years, not just the year the war ended. Amounts do not include pension costs and other benefits for veterans, which over time tend to triple the cost of the war.

Real War Cost is expressed in year 2000 (billion) dollars for the year the war ended. This is not always the year war expenditure was highest, notably for WWI, when expenditures were much higher in 1919 than 1918.  It is the total cost of that war for all years, not just the year the war ended.  Conversion rates are less meaningful for years prior to 1900. Amounts do not include pension costs and other benefits for veterans, which over time tend to triple the cost of the war.  Conversion rates are considerably less meaningful for years prior to 1900.

Total Federal Expenditures is the total amount of money spent by the federal government in the year the war ended, expressed in year 2000 dollars. It is included to allow some comparison between the cost of the war and the size of the federal government in general at that time. These numbers do not include “off budget” items such as Social Security, which are an increasingly larger percentage as time goes by. Thus real Total Federal Expenditures are increasingly understated in later years, both in dollars and as a % of GDP. Conversion rates are considerably less meaningful for years prior to 1900.

War Cost as a % of Total Federal Expenditures uses year 2000 dollars for both amounts. It is included to allow some comparison between the cost of the war and the size of the federal government in general at that time. Conversion rates are considerably less meaningful for years prior to 1900.

Total Federal Expenditures as a % of GDP uses year 2000 dollars for both amounts. It is included to allow some comparison between the cost of the war and the size of the federal government in general at that time. Conversion rates are considerably less meaningful for years prior to 1900.

Notes: WBTS costs do not include Confederate War Cost or other numbers for the CSA, and certainly not the cost of the destruction of (mostly) southern property and infrastructure, mainly because I was unable to find good numbers for these amounts. Although by 1865 the CSA hardly had a GDP.  The capital lost just by the freeing of the slaves (in financial terms this constituted confiscation of capital) was probably at least $3B at the time, or perhaps $32B in year 2000 dollars. Some of this value was lost from Union states, but the vast majority was lost by (formerly) CSA states. The total financial cost of the war to the CSA was undoubtedly much higher than to the USA, and it was spread out over a much smaller population. However, I’ve been unable to quantify this cost.

I was unable to locate Total Federal Expenditures for the years the War of 1812 and Mexican Wars ended, but in each case the % applied to War Cost would be very high.  I was also unable to locate much good data on the cost of the Revolutionary War, so I left it out entirely.  Much of the US cost for the Gulf War was paid by contributions from allies, so I left this war out also.

Prior to WWII Total Federal Expenditures took a nosedive in the years immediately following each war, so the Total Federal Expenditures for the year the war ended is not representative of Total Federal Expenditures for the period in general.  Following WWII Total Federal Expenditures are not affected nearly as much by whether a war is in progress or not, they just trend upwards every year regardless.

 

 

[Sherman Logan]

Thanx!

I’ve always thought it makes more sense to mutually agree on what the facts are and then argue about what they mean. Most arguments, on FR and elsewhere, seem to try to combine the two modes of discussion, which in my opinion works poorly and in the interest of the guy with the weaker argument.

Its main effect is that no argument ever ends.

[Cpl.Nym]

A list of URLs would be helpful. I would like to post this on a left-leaning board. They will scream Source, Source. Thanks for posting

[Sherman Logan]

Here you go. I believe this is all the sources. As I’ve said, I can’t vouch directly that all the numbers are correct. They’re just the best I could find.

http://eh.net/hmit/gdp/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_the_United_States

http://republicans.appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=GeneralInformation.BackgroundInformation

http://www.civilwarhome.com/population1860.htm

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/sheets/hist01z1.xls

http://www.mnforsustain.org/united_states_population_growth_graph.htm

http://www.npg.org/facts/us_historical_pops.htm

http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/hist.pdf

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/other/stats/warcost.htm

[Sherman Logan]

It would be nice if you could send me a link when you post it elsewhere. I’m interested in what others have to say.

[Albertafriend]

So what is the cost of maintaining the military involved in this war and their equipment if they were not in Iraq, i.e. stationed somewhere else in the world or just on their bases in the U.S.? They all still have to be paid, there still has to be eqipment for training and drill and they still have to maintain the equipment and buy new stuff. So how much is the difference? Isn’t that the real cost of the war?

[crazyhorse691]

Save for reference...you hit the bigtime, you are a reference.

[Sherman Logan]

Excellent point, which is supposedly allowed for in this source from the Congressional Research Service.

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html

But there are so many games that can be played with the numbers by somebody with an ax to grind that your guess is as good as mine.

[El Gato]

This indicates that about 1/3 of total Defense expenditures are for the Iraq war. I wonder if that is correct? If so, given that defense spending has only risen about 10% since the last Clinton budget, you can see that the military is being hollowed out to fight the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hell holes such as Djibouti where we have troops deployed in the fight against Islamic terrorism.

It means that we are cutting nearly everything else. R&D is taking a big hit, bigger than under Clinton. They are cutting funding for the mess halls for Pete's sake.

Normally Defense expenditures as a fraction of GDP rise quite a bit during a shooting war. This time the increase was only about 10% and that was from a post WW-II low of less than 3% of GDP.

[Pelham]

The War for Southern Independence.

[Pelham]

Great minds...