Iraq isn’t costing three trillion dollars
Posted: December 15, 2011 Filed under: Federal Budget and Budget deficit, Iraq, U.S. Politics 8 CommentsRemember when Bilmes and Stiglitz published The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict in early 2008? There was much discussion about how it wasn’t true, how they’d overcounted this, and undercounted that. (E.g. 1)
Well, it turns out it was indeed not true.
It’s costing four trillion dollars. ($4,000,000,000,000. Actually, with those sorts of numbers, you’re really supposed to use scientific notation: $4 x 1012.)
That’s just the loss for the USA. It doesn’t count the cost for the troops of other nations. It doesn’t include the costs in Iraq. All told, six or seven trillion dollars’ worth of smoke and rubble is probably a cautious and conservative estimate.
The good news is there was nothing else that needed doing, so it’s not as if it matters.
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
When am I going to wake up from this nightmare?
Honestly.
Isn’t that around the same amount of money that the Fed dealt out to all the banks around the world?
Yup. Except the Fed was largely paid back. Anytime they (“They”) want to pay me back my share of that, I’ll be glad to sign for the check!
So there’s no money for social programs, the belt on the middle class and poor needs to be tightened to offset the debt that they had no hand in creating but hey, there’s a neat war that needs to be fought and there’s plenty of money (taken from the middle class and poor) to fight it. Geebus that is sickening. I don’t often comment, but this is obscene.
Yup. Obscene like Sandusky. I.e. also criminal.
Since the war was apparently put “on credit”, what about the ongoing interest rate charges on this war debt that is probably not being paid down but probably interest only payments are being made.
That’s part of the reason the amount is so huge. Interest is included, as well as downstream medical costs of caring for vets, etc., etc. Stiglitz is a Grand Old Man of economics, and Bilmes is no slouch either. They thought of that. 😀