Iraq war could cost US over 2 trillion, says Nobel prize-winning economist

[cal04]

Iraq war could cost US over $2 trillion, says Nobel prize-winning economist
· Economists say official estimates are far too low
· New calculation takes in dead and injured soldiers
The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert. The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the war.

The report came during one of the most deadly periods in Iraq since the invasion, with the US military yesterday revising upwards to 11 the number of its troops killed during a wave of insurgent attacks on Thursday. More than 130 civilians were also killed when suicide bombers struck Shia pilgrims in Karbala and a police recruiting station in Ramadi.

The paper on the real cost of the war, written by Joseph Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor who won the Nobel prize for economics in 2001, and Linda Bilmes, a Harvard budget expert, is likely to add to the pressure on the White House on the war. It also followed the revelation this week that the White House had scaled back ambitions to rebuild Iraq and did not intend to seek funds for reconstruction.

Mr Stiglitz told the Guardian that despite the staggering costs laid out in their paper the economists had erred on the side of caution. "Our estimates are very conservative, and it could be that the final costs will be much higher. And it should be noted they do not include the costs of the conflict to either Iraq or the UK." In 2003, as US and British troops were massing on the Iraq border, Larry Lindsey, George Bush's economic adviser, suggested the costs might reach $200bn. The White House said the figure was far too high, and the deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, said Iraq could finance its own reconstruction. Three years later, with more than 140,000 US soldiers on the ground in Iraq, even the $200bn figure was very low, according to the two economists.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1681119,00.html

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Here's a graphic from the NYT

[Karenina]

5. Kick!

:kick:

[bananas]

2. the paper will be available on josephstiglitz.com

"Mr Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist, said the paper, which will be available on josephstiglitz.com, did not attempt to explain whether Americans were deliberately misled or whether the underestimate was due to incompetence."

[teryang]

3. It's fraud pure and simple

Anyone smarter than a box of rocks should know by now.

[oasis]

4. 2 or 200 trillion. Bush won't raise taxes on the nation's ultra rich.

That would hurt the growth of our economy. :eyes:

[Nutmegger]

6. I know, tax cuts...

while we are living under enormous debt. Hey, why don't we just get rid of all the taxes for the rich then we can dump some social programs because all the effing libs care about are things, oh I don't know, health-care, campaign finance reform, education, medicare....yeah, OMG we're "evil".

By the way, I don't have the exact figure, but I believe 80% of corporations evade from paying taxes. This was their war, at least they should pay for it.

Sick bastards...