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

retrogrouch_at_comcast.net
Date: 07/31/04 

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:40:26 GMT

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.
>
>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.
>
>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.
>
>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?

You're being silly. It's the highest in absolute terms. Adjusted for
inflation or stated as a percentage of GDP it is not the highest.

In WWII we ran phenomenal deficits to fund the war. (I'm having
trouble finding the numbers quickly perhaps someone else will post
them.

That said here's a good analysis of deficits for the last 40 years.

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/1664/1/2/

- - - -
Just another albino black sheep

Relevant Pages