Re: Here's an Interesting Question: Has Bush's Wars Cost More Than WWII?

From: Torsten Brinch (iaotb_at_inet.uni2.dk)
Date: 07/31/04 

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 15:19:09 +0200

On 31 Jul 2004 03:19:53 -0700, Melchizedek@USA.com (Psalm 110) wrote:

>http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,10298772%255E1702,00.html
>
>Here's an Interesting Question: Has Bush's Wars Cost More Than WWII?
>
>The news is reporting the highest deficit in USA history,
>$445,000,000,000.00. If it is the HIGHEST in USA history, than it
>would be higher than 4 years of WWII. If the deficit was higher after
>WWII than this couldn't be the HIGHEST.

Well, that number you are pointing to is just the budget deficit.
In absolute numbers, it is indeed the highest in USA history. Relative
to GDP, otoh, it is nothing to write home about, a petty few per cent
of it. I mean, you only have to go back to the 1980's to find budget
deficits as percentage of GDP, double of that. And during WWII US
budget deficits ran at 20+ per cent of the GDP.

>The ONLY way this could be the HIGHEST EVER in the entire history of
>the USA is if these pissant wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost
>significantly more that WWII.

Oh, that's a non sequitur. There are dozens of ways to run up a
budget deficit. If it just fits the pattern, that the government lays
out more money than it gets in, it'll do.

>WWII had the buildup of thousands of ships and many tens of thousands
>of fighte and bomber planes, and the costs of outfitting 3,000,000 men
>in uniform. It is hard to imagine that all that did not cost what
>George W. Bush has spent since 9/11, only 36 months ago.

Right, that's hard to imagine. I'd say, it is not credible. If it were
true, noone would believe it.

>Bush hasn't spent money on anything else: he cut environment, he cut
>schools, he cut veterans benefits from the guys who fought WWII.

>Can it be that Bush really has outspent WWII?

It is just not plausible, that he has.

Relevant Pages