Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
$2447 is the pro-rata share of the Iraq war bill that every American tax payer paid in 2006. According to a new study by Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, the entire war bill will come to over $15,000 per person.
Considering all the other problems the U.S. faces, do you think this is a prudent use of your money? What has been achieved? What do you think you have to show for this expenditure?
Wouldn't it have been more cost effective for us to just mail our $15,000 to some Iraqi citizen and let them topple Saddam? Without destroying the infrastructure?
$2447 is the pro-rata share of the Iraq war bill that every American tax payer paid in 2006. According to a new study by Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, the entire war bill will come to over $15,000 per person.
Considering all the other problems the U.S. faces, do you think this is a prudent use of your money? What has been achieved? What do you think you have to show for this expenditure?
I don't have a nobel prize but I came up with similar numbers with a little research, and windows "calc".
...and no, it's a waste of money. I knew there were "strings" attached to that little $400 check Bush sent out a few years ago, but I never imagined a suspension cable.
$2447 is the pro-rata share of the Iraq war bill that every American tax payer paid in 2006. According to a new study by Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, the entire war bill will come to over $15,000 per person.
Considering all the other problems the U.S. faces, do you think this is a prudent use of your money? What has been achieved? What do you think you have to show for this expenditure?
Ahh, who cares. The adults won't have to pay it. Push it out 30 years, with interest, let the kids pay for it.
After they're done paying into Social Security first, of course.
What's the purpose of this post? This has already been discussed in the "Saddam is dead, is it worth it" post and the "3,000 lives, was it worth it" post, and probably a dozen others.
For the record - ask me in 20 years if it was worth it when the historical facts can be evaulatued without bias.
What's the purpose of this post? This has already been discussed in the "Saddam is dead, is it worth it" post and the "3,000 lives, was it worth it" post, and probably a dozen others.
For the record - ask me in 20 years if it was worth it when the historical facts can be evaulatued without bias.
Just curious, will you be collecting Social Security in 20 years?
Just curious, will you be collecting Social Security in 20 years?
Heck no, I don't expect to collect a cent. Now THAT'S a quaqmire and the impact of the cost of the Iraq war is immaterial and irrelevant to that equation. I am making other preperations - heavy investments in 401K's etc.
Heck no, I don't expect to collect a cent. Now THAT'S a quaqmire and the impact of the cost of the Iraq war is immaterial and irrelevant to that equation. I am making other preperations - heavy investments in 401K's etc.
It is material. When you're retired and the working population is paying off the war debt, trust me, you'll be feeling it too. 410(k) or no 410(k).
What's the purpose of this post? This has already been discussed in the "Saddam is dead, is it worth it" post and the "3,000 lives, was it worth it" post, and probably a dozen others.
For the record - ask me in 20 years if it was worth it when the historical facts can be evaulatued without bias.
The purpose of this post is to question questionable policy. There is at least apocryphal evidence that bin Laden had said that simply bringing down two skyscrapers was not the intent of the attack. The intent was to incite "the infidels of America" to take up a new crusade that would bleed them dry in economic expenditures. We stand at the threshold of major domestic crises, yet we're going to spend 2 trillion dollars on a "war on terror"? There's nothing to win and no way to win it. Look like we're taking the bait. Bin Laden wins.
It is money well spent Aleast it has an intended purpose unlike Welfare, etc
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
