candy331
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:20 AM
Original message |
In VP debate Cheney said Edwards was mistaken about the $200billion |
|
spent in Iraq, that it was actually $120 billion. Now I could have sworn that all I have heard basically is the $200 billion and counting, was that a misspeak by Edwards or a play on the numbers by Cheney, with the media grabbing it to counter Cheney's lie about not meeting Edwards? Does anyone know the actual amount that has already been spent and more that is already allocated?
|
Parche
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |
|
What I have heard that it is over $200 billion allocated and over $120billion spent so far
|
bmbmd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Eighty billion in Afghanistan |
Goldmund
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:22 AM
Response to Original message |
3. What the pundits have been saying is... |
|
...that the $200 billion includes the money allocated for next year.
I think, myself, that even if that's true, it's a moot point. The cost of the war is not going to be less than $200 billion (even if not all of it has been spent yet), and therefore it's $200 billion that could have been spent otherwise had we not gone to war -- which was Edwards' point.
|
Ready4Change
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:23 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Depends on which numbers you look at. |
|
Edited on Thu Oct-07-04 11:27 AM by Ready4Change
Both have figures to support their statements, so neither is really incorrect or lying. It's just a matter of what categories of costs you include.
On edit: I feel a need to add that I give more credence to the 200 billion number. After all, Kerry voted against an 87 billion bill, and Bush later went to Congress asking for, what was the figure? 65 billion? That's 152 billion earmarked right there.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:24 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Big picture missed: How much did Bush SAY it was going to cost? |
|
Didn't Bush say it was going to be all paid for with the oil from Iraq and it would only cost 1 billion dollars anyway? If he did, he's off by a factor of 120, so even if the full 200 billion hasn't been spent, Bush is still a liar and the resources allocated are still far more than what this war was sold on.
|
Bandit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:25 AM
Response to Original message |
6. It is kind of like buying a car and giving a $1000 down |
|
The cost of the car was not a thousand dollars even though that is all you paid up front. 200 billion is a very conservative figure at best.
|
nyhuskyfan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:27 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Sam Seder had a great analogy |
|
If you put $1,000 down on a car and agree to spend $300 a month for the next five years, would you tell anyone that the car cost you $1,000?
|
Viking12
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:27 AM
Response to Original message |
8. The repigs are playing games w/ numbers |
|
Edited on Thu Oct-07-04 11:29 AM by Viking12
If you paid $150k for your house but only put $15K down that doesn't mean you've only spent $15k -- you've committed to spending another large chunk of change and that should be taken into account. Saying that we haven't "spent" $200B is technically accurate but it is not the truth - we have to date spent $120B and we have committed more than $80B++ for a total of $200B. Look for that number to continue to grow as time passes.
|
Touchdown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:30 AM
Response to Original message |
9. $80 Billion is already allocated, |
|
...so it can't be spent on something else.
Say you're buying a car. Let's reduce this money to a car's level. it's a $20,000 car. You bring $12,000 to the dealer. You have to finance $8,000 to pay it off, right? You might have already paid $12,000 for it, but that doesn't mean that the car is worth $12,000. That's what Cheney want's you to believe. That since $12,000 was already paid for the car, that's all that was necessary, and GM credit will just forget about the extra $8,000. We still owe $80 BILLION, and we have to pay for it.
|
seabeyond
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:32 AM
Response to Original message |
10. so lets set an example, tomorrow night |
|
kerry can say number is 120.............we added the 80 from afghanistan. it was a package deal. and then say, k.........has cost 120 billion so far. that hurts too
|
jbond56
(295 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-07-04 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
|
The 120 billion is already spent. Which is the smallest number you can use and still be technically correct. If your Responsible, understand budgets, and want to be Honest with the American people use the amount budgeted. It is to early to determine whether 200 billion will reflect the actual amount spent. Judging from all that enormously hard work the administration did planing this war, I think it will be higher. As of today the 200 number includes some money to fight the terrorist that attacked us at home. I think that amount is somewhere around 20b. Makes you wonder why Osama is still on the lamb.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:00 AM
Response to Original message |