A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon we’re talking about real money

October 24, 2007

When dealing with the cost of the president’s policies in the Middle East, at the top of the priority list is the human cost, with Americans who’ve lost their lives, and thousands more who have suffered serious injuries.

But there are also financial costs to consider, and they are staggering.

The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release today.

A previous CBO estimate put the wars’ costs at more than $1.6 trillion. This one adds $705 billion in interest, taking into account that the conflicts are being funded with borrowed money.

The new estimate also includes President Bush’s request Monday for another $46 billion in war funding, said Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., budget committee chairman, who provided the CBO’s new numbers to USA TODAY.

Assuming that Iraq accounts for about 80% of that total, the Iraq war would cost $1.9 trillion, including $564 million in interest, said Thomas Kahn, Spratt’s staff director. The committee holds a hearing on war costs this morning.

The White House budget office said Congress was trying to “artificially inflate war funding levels.” Asked how much the administration thinks the war actually costs, the White House budget office refused to say. What a surprise.

Two other quick angles to consider. First, let’s not forget that the Bush gang was asked how much they estimated the war in Iraq would cost. Administration officials said it would be no more than $50 billion. That figure now covers about four months in Iraq, not including interest.

Second, the House Budget Committee held a hearing today to discuss the $2.4 trillion price tag. Republican lawmakers on the committee didn’t show up.

Holy crap! The government is being charged around 30% interest?!?!?

Wow. Bush hasn’t just put the country in hock, he’s turned it into a subprime borrower.

Sweet lord …

  • From the wayback machine…

    See post #11.
    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/11670.html

    And who can forget that the original estimate of the cost was $1.7 Billion?

    I’ll tell you who: The “watchdog media”. Here’s an interview they should be referring to often, but of course they never do:

    Nightline: Project Iraq
    Wednesday April 23, 2003

    TED KOPPEL
    (Off Camera) Well, it’s a, I think you’ll agree, this is a much bigger project than any that’s been talked about. Indeed, I understand that more money is expected to be spent on this than was spent on the entire Marshall Plan for the rebuilding of Europe after World War II.

    ANDREW NATSIOS
    No, no. This doesn’t even compare remotely with the size of the Marshall Plan.

    TED KOPPEL
    (Off Camera) The Marshall Plan was $97 billion.

    ANDREW NATSIOS
    This is 1.7 billion.

    TED KOPPEL
    (Off Camera) All right, this is the first. I mean, when you talk about 1.7, you’re not suggesting that the rebuilding of Iraq is gonna be done for $1.7 billion?

    ANDREW NATSIOS
    Well, in terms of the American taxpayers contribution, I do, this is it for the US. The rest of the rebuilding of Iraq will be done by other countries who have already made pledges, Britain, Germany, Norway, Japan, Canada, and Iraqi oil revenues, eventually in several years, when it’s up and running and there’s a new government that’s been democratically elected, will finish the job with their own revenues. They’re going to get in $20 billion a year in oil revenues. But the American part of this will be 1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this.

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/temp/natsios042303.html

    Apparently the media is like Cheney and Gonzales, they can forget almost anything. The original estimate is going to be off by a factor of 1,000*, and that fact is only known to the bloggers.

    And Natsios? He’s the “special envoy to Sudan”.
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/natsios-bio.html

    * of course it’s now off by an even larger factor.

  • We need a tax on the media pegged to the deficit. THEN maybe the folks with the bull horn would take a serious interest in a balanced budget and controlled spending. For sure the %*#$& politicians never will.

  • The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release today.

    See? An’ y’all are bitchin’ about the country not sacrificing for the war…

    And, Mark D, @1,

    That usurious rate of interest? China probably figures US cannot be trusted to ever pay off the debt itself (especially if the dollar continues to tank), so they’re grabbing what they can and while they can in interest on it.

    Sometimes, I wonder if the real cost of our war in Iraq won’t be the same as the cost of Afghanistan wars was to the USSR — the fall of the empire…

  • Catherine, @6.

    Chances of Repubs giving a rat’s ass about *Iraqi* dead (or maimed or displaced), when they can’t scramble up enough compassion for the Americans to fund VA properly, are big, fat, zero. Showing them how the war hits them in the pocket, OTOH, might find some resonance. I’ve often thought we’re too PC to talk *money* when it comes to this fiasco.

  • Sometimes, I wonder if the real cost of our war in Iraq won’t be the same as the cost of Afghanistan wars was to the USSR — the fall of the empire…

    If it weren’t for all the damn lives it was costing in paying off that cost, I’d fucking cheer it on. The time for empires has passed, and only the reactionary “conservatives” in this country and in other countries around the globe refuse to realize it.

  • The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release today.

    I read that two or three times before I realized we were talking about this country. But looking at it another way, $2.4 Trillion is about $48,000 for every man, woman and child in Iraq and Afghanistan. I’ll bet if we cut our losses and wrote them all out a check for $10,000 each we could get them all to stop fighting each other and us long enough for us to pack up and get the hell on out of there.

  • If we spent anywhere near that on weening ourselves off oil, we wouldn’t need to start wars over natural resources. Somehow it’s more acceptable to invade sovereign nations than to say, fund research on renewable energy..

  • That usurious rate of interest? China probably figures US cannot be trusted to ever pay off the debt itself (especially if the dollar continues to tank), so they’re grabbing what they can and while they can in interest on it.

    Which is why I’ve been saying for years that the U.S. will never, ever be invaded by a foreign army, blown up with nukes or destroyed by terrorists.

    The U.S. as we know it will end because China and India will purchase us into irrelevance.

    If anyone can tell me why that won’t happen, I’m all ears (or eyes, in this case).

  • That is not 30% for one year. It is like charging $160 billion (in some years more, and in some years less) per year to your credit card, for 15 years, and paying interest as you go. The rate is probably about 4.5% APR.
    What it probably doesn’t include is the fact that the interest rate on the rest of the national debt would be lower if we weren’t running up such a big balance.
    Aside from the horrendous loss of life (American and other), we could be spending the money on much more constructive things.

  • ow long would this war have lasted if we, instead of our grandchildren, were paying for it? A $1 per gallon on gasoline plus a progressive 5-15% surtax on incomes over $50,000.
    could have made a huge difference. At least many of us would have done some sacrificing instead of just the troops and their families.

    homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com

  • I guess I should have noted that my 30% figure was the total percentage of interest paid, not the APR (which, of course, is different than the interest rate).

    I’m glad, though, that someone checked my math (there’s a reason I’m not allowed within 10 feet of the family checkbook).

    🙂

    • Comments are closed.