View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:07 pm Post subject: $$ Cost of War statistic moot? |
|
|
Often I've heard people say that the war in Iraq/Afghanistan costs XXXXX billion dollars and they throw that number around saying that the money could be used for other things.
That got me thinking, where do those people think the money is going? Do they think the money goes into a big bonfire and gets burned?
The war probably did as much to stimulate the US economy as the Stimulus Bill that went through Congress. Now, here me out. The money the US spends on the war goes towards paying their soldiers, replenishing supplies, and buying more weapons/bombs. Most of those things which come from.........wait for it..... US companies. I remember reading a while back about how army MRE's come from some French company but I don't know if that is true anymore.
Yes, the money spent on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan could've been used for other purposes. I'm not going to argue that. But if someone says "The War in ______ costs $XXX,XXX,XXX,XXX and that money could been used for A, B, C, etc...."; couldn't you just turn around and say "the money spent in the war went to American companies, indirectly helping the economy." |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:16 pm Post subject: Re: $$ Cost of War statistic moot? |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
Often I've heard people say that the war in Iraq/Afghanistan costs XXXXX billion dollars and they throw that number around saying that the money could be used for other things.
That got me thinking, where do those people think the money is going? Do they think the money goes into a big bonfire and gets burned?
The war probably did as much to stimulate the US economy as the Stimulus Bill that went through Congress. Now, here me out. The money the US spends on the war goes towards paying their soldiers, replenishing supplies, and buying more weapons/bombs. Most of those things which come from.........wait for it..... US companies. I remember reading a while back about how army MRE's come from some French company but I don't know if that is true anymore.
Yes, the money spent on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan could've been used for other purposes. I'm not going to argue that. But if someone says "The War in ______ costs $XXX,XXX,XXX,XXX and that money could been used for A, B, C, etc...."; couldn't you just turn around and say "the money spent in the war went to American companies, indirectly helping the economy." |
I don't think you understand the nature of the claim in question. I'll put foward two scenarios for you:
1) Spend $X in war expenditures. Jobs are to some extent created by this expenditure, and what we as a society gain beyond those jobs is nothing, as weapons in no way improve the lives of the average citizen.
2) Spend $X in domestic expenditures. A comparable number of jobs are to some extent created by this expenditure, and what we as a society gain beyond those jobs is whatever beneficial domestic program or development we expended it on, be it roads, parks, more educated citizens, cheaper health care, or so forth.
Both expendituers create jobs to some extent, but we don't really get anything except those jobs from the Iraqi/Afghani War-based military spending (not even security; shooting people in Iraq and Afganistan doesn't make us any safer, and if anything is likely to fuel Muslim radicalization, causing more problems in the future). With the second type of expenditure, we get jobs and something else of lasting value. That's what people are referring to. Why get jobs and nothing when you could get jobs and something? Why pay an American company to make bombs when you could pay them to make railroads? Bombs don't help our citizenry at all; railroads do.
Any more Republican talking points that need dispelling? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't argue that the money couldn't have been better used someplace else. I even said so in OP.
What point I'm trying to make is that people quote the cost of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars like the money is going in some bottomless pit never to be seen again.
I jsut want to clarify that the money is actually going BACK into the US economy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't argue that the money couldn't have been better used someplace else. I even said so in OP.
What point I'm trying to make is that people quote the cost of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars like the money is going in some bottomless pit never to be seen again.
I jsut want to clarify that the money is actually going BACK into the US economy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So if North Korea uses most of it's money on it's military industrial complex it's actually going BACK into their economy right?
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
redaxe
Joined: 01 Dec 2008
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The thing is that Republicans are now (ironically) pushing BALANCING THE BUDGET as THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE in U.S. politics right now. If the last Republican president didn't start two wars, we wouldn't have this problem in the first place!!! Sure, war stimulates certain parts of the economy, but it sure didn't save us from the housing bubble meltdown!! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gamecock

Joined: 26 Nov 2003
|
Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, a lot of money did just get thrown "into a big bonfire" in Iraq. Didn't you hear about the 15 billion the defense department lost and could not account for? Or the massive amount of money being used to pay off the opposing groups in Iraq to calm down the civil war. It's no big secret that the success of the "surge" a few years ago was actually a surge of millions of dollars in bribes being put in the pockets of Iraqis to calm the hell down. So that money is not helping us, for sure.
This does not include paying Halliburton dump truck drivers over 100,000 a year to move sand from Kuwait to Iraq (that's right, sand). So I suppose the massively inflated amount paid to private contractors somehow benefits the economy....ummmm...well, it primarily helps stimulate the pocketbooks of the CEO's of these companies (and we're all seeing the fruit of trickle-down economics these days). But the soldiers aren't getting rich, and the stateside factory workers in these defense companies aren't going to see much benefit.
Then there is the cash we will spend to "rebuild" Iraq. And we will. The U.S. government is a huge cash giveaway extravaganza to friends and allies (ask Israel and Egypt who we pay off every year not to fight each other(peace in the middle east!) as well as fund Israel's military...etc, etc). As we police the world we are throwing money around all over the world which in no way stimulates our economy, yet we can't come up with a plan to give everyone in our own country adequate medical coverage like everyone else in the 1st world does...its shameful! The arguments about money are simply partisan.
The massive amount spent on these wars could be used for a much better purpose. It is MASSIVE. It makes the stimulus bill look like peanuts. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
UknowsI

Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:30 pm Post subject: Re: $$ Cost of War statistic moot? |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
Do they think the money goes into a big bonfire and gets burned?
|
Burning money in a big bonfire would actually be much more beneficial as long as they are burning USD. Burning the money will increase the value of USD and if you reprint the money you have only lost the production cost of the bills and not their value. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
redaxe
Joined: 01 Dec 2008
|
Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:45 pm Post subject: Re: $$ Cost of War statistic moot? |
|
|
UknowsI wrote: |
pkang0202 wrote: |
Do they think the money goes into a big bonfire and gets burned?
|
Burning money in a big bonfire would actually be much more beneficial as long as they are burning USD. Burning the money will increase the value of USD and if you reprint the money you have only lost the production cost of the bills and not their value. |
That's pretty funny, but reducing the money supply isn't so good for an economy either. When the value of the currency goes up vis-a-vis market prices, people hoard money, and consumer spending basically grinds to a halt. That's what happened to Japan in the 1990's. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|