SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Intercept reports:
The total U.S. budgetary cost of war since 2001 is $4.79 trillion, according to a report [PDF] [...] from Brown University's Watson Institute. That's the highest estimate yet.
Neta Crawford of Boston University, the author of the report, included interest on borrowing, future veterans needs, and the cost of homeland security in her calculations.
The amount of $4.79 trillion, "so large as to be almost incomprehensible", she writes, adds up like this:
- The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and other overseas operations already cost $1.7 trillion between 2001 and August 2016 with $103 billion more requested for 2017
- Homeland Security terrorism prevention costs from 2001 to 2016 were $548 billion.
- The estimated DOD base budget was $733 billion and veterans spending was $213 billion.
- Interest incurred on borrowing for wars was $453 billion.
- Estimated future costs for veterans' medical needs until the year 2053 is $1 trillion.
- And the amounts the DOD, State Department, and Homeland Security have requested for 2017 ($103 billion).
Crawford carried out a similar study[PDF] in June 2014 that estimated the cost of war at $4.4 trillion.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Total Cost of USA's Wars Since 2001 Approaches $5 Trillion
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 104 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I don't want a pickle,
I just wanna ride on my motorsickle.
And I don't want to die,
I just want to ride on my motorcy.
Cle.
-- Arlo Guthrie
(Score: 4, Insightful) by rts008 on Tuesday October 25 2016, @11:24AM
Is this ONLY the US foreign wars being counted? Why not add the costs of the War on Drugs to the tally for a more complete(Total, as the title claims) picture. The taxpayers are funding both.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 25 2016, @01:11PM
Don't forget the first of the "wars" we started losing: the war on poverty. You have to add in all the money that's been channelled to funding the indolence of the lowest classes and their multiplication through breeding while the working middle class starves and sees its Obamacare tax rise 25% this year alone.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday October 25 2016, @01:26PM
If the middle class has been forced to shop at WalMart these days, from what I can see, they're not starving.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 25 2016, @03:30PM
Maybe they are not starving, but they are suffering from poor nutrition. It is just as damaging to their health as starvation (results in diminished life satisfaction and eventual death), thou not as immediate.
Poor nutrition brought on by economic forces is very tragic. There are very good examples such as this [nih.gov] this [who.int] and this [bbc.com]. What is happening to the Walmart crowd is quite similar.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 25 2016, @06:16PM
What a bunch of politically correct drivel. People get fat because they eat too damned much. Some starving would do them good.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday October 25 2016, @06:25PM
If they are suffering from poor nutrition, it's due to poor choices of foods they stick in their faces. There's plenty of calories available, in many forms - nobody is forcing them to eat at McDonalds.
However, having said that, the fast and unhealthy food industry is quite strong, and gained a lot of ex-tobacco leadership in the late 1980s / early 1990s when tobacco was getting legislated into lower profitability. A sizeable chunk of the American population is addicted to unhealthy foods, and it's not just because they choose to indulge - the formulation and marketing is specifically designed to make that happen, as it was for cigarettes.
But, back to the earlier point, the middle class can afford food, healthy food if they want, junk food if they're addicted, but either is well within their means.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 25 2016, @02:08PM
What I'm still trying to figure out is that if being middle class is so bad right now, how does one become one of these lower classes that live completely and comfortably off government benefits? I'm gay, so I should qualify for something, right? Plus I'll be voting Democrat this year for the first time in my life. Where do I sign up for these freebies?
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday October 25 2016, @10:00PM
Don't forget the first of the "wars" we started losing: the war on poverty. You have to add in all the money that's been channelled to funding the indolence of the lowest classes and their multiplication through breeding while the working middle class starves and sees its Obamacare tax rise 25% this year alone.
Except that we weren't losing the war on poverty. The poverty rate declined steadily from roughly 22% in the late 1950's until it reached a low of roughly 11 percent in 1973. It fluctuated between 11 and 12.5% in the rest of the 1970's but started to rise quickly in 1980, reaching 15% by 1983. It started declining again in the early 1990's, almost back down to 11% again by 2000, but since then it has risen again, reaching 15% again by 2010.