What is Digg?Sponsored by Double Your Dating
The "Bad Boy Way" To Meet Women Online view!
doubleyourdating.com - You don't have to be a bad boy to succeed with the ladies - but here's a lesson ANY GUY can use...
121 Comments
- sophia269, on 11/05/2007, -1/+78When it comes to the war in Iraq, no one questions the cost. When it comes to something like Universal Healthcare where all Americans can be insured, politicians are always saying.. "where are you going to get the money to pay for this?!" How about we pull out of Iraq and spend all of that money at home instead.
- Jexie, on 11/05/2007, -4/+73And the Republicans think its the Democrats who tax and spend, who the hell do they think is going to end up paying for this? Nobody, anywhere else in any kind of position could be this wrong and still hold their job/office. America needs to get a pair and impeach these bastards already, or better yet lock them up in prison.
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -2/+59War in Iraq = Good Investment
Education + Healthcare + Children = Bad Investment? - BrainRecall, on 11/05/2007, -5/+55THIS is why you can't be pro-war AND conservative. Talking with people is far cheaper.
- mrASSMAN, on 11/06/2007, -0/+27Everyone who gave accurate predictions were fired immediately.
- brentinkc, on 11/06/2007, -3/+29WHAT WAS THE PREDICTED COST OF THE WAR IN IRAQ IN AMERICAN LIVES?!?!!?
DID WE EXCEED THAT PREDICTION!!!???
More American soldiers have died in Iraq than American civilians that died on 9/11
We have been in Iraq longer than we were involved in WORLD WAR II
Habeas Corpus has been suspended for the first time since the Civil War
The cost of Iraq is not measured in dollars, it is measured in American blood and sacrifices of civil liberties - pintomp3, on 11/05/2007, -0/+20General Eric Shinseki told Congress in early 2003 it would take at least 300,000 troops to safely garrison Iraq after a military victory. But he got fired and nobody came to his defense.
- Mohdoo, on 11/05/2007, -0/+16Now is it that the costs exceeded their predictions, or that the people giving us those numbers were being deceitful?
- SilverStandard, on 11/05/2007, -3/+18I thought the cost was $2.4 trillion.
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -1/+13BUSH'S ECONOMY SETS NEW RECORDS
Record number of new Bankruptcies
Record number of new Foreclosures
Record High Deficit (biggest in History)
Record number of people without Health Insurance in 30 years
Record number of people falling BELOW the poverty line in the last 27 years.
Record number of people considered "Not particpating in the Work Force" (69 million workers are NOT counted as unemployed)
Some record.
And while I agree, previous policies do come in to play, Bush tried to immediately emulate the Reagan years by encouraging Americans to spend spend spend. He couldn't wait to flush out the surplus Clinton handed him, and the general attitude in the US became one of "if you don't spend your money, you are not a good American". This philosophy would make a lot more sense if the ***** we buy was actually made in America, but most if it is not, so instead of all the spending going right back into the hands of hard working Americans, a huge chunk is going into China, Japan, and other manufacturing nations. So it is safe to say that the blame for a lot of the current financial problems is on the Bush administration. - pintomp3, on 11/06/2007, -1/+13wolfowitz said it would cost about 1.5 billion. he and his PNAC/AIPAC buddies should have to pay the difference. it's their war.
- dafragsta, on 11/06/2007, -1/+12Congratulations America. Your apathy for when it comes time to vote, is about to hit home.
- mbradbury, on 11/05/2007, -0/+11Economist in 2003 predicted Iraq war cost. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxzXo78WqSM
- Bdog2g2, on 11/04/2007, -1/+10Math according to politicians.
- mOdQuArK, on 11/05/2007, -0/+8Actually, tax & spend _IS_ better than borrow-and-spend, since the people who are being taxed will have an incentive to push back on boneheading spending priorities earlier than when the government is running up the credit card.
- pintomp3, on 11/05/2007, -2/+10the constitution doesn't specifically outline roads, police, or fire fighting either. taxes aren't the problem, corruption and corporatism are. people should get a return for what their taxes pay for.
- q1006662, on 11/05/2007, -0/+8They're all bad investments right now, as this is all paid for with borrowed money. Debt Reduction = Good Investment
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -0/+8The obvious difference: one is paying for medicine we all need and one is paying for an illegal invasion that no one needs.
- mbierman, on 11/05/2007, -1/+8Think back....
"Before the war, White House economic adviser Lawrence Lindsay estimated the cost at $100 to $200 billion. We're now near $300 billion, and annual costs are still rising. The White House got rid of Lindsay and "re-estimated" the cost at $50 to $60 billion.
One problem was a complete lack of realism by the neocons, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and others. Not only did they assure us the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms and the war would likely end in five to six weeks, but they persuaded much of the country that Iraq's oil would pay for the war. Even if oil production had gone up as predicted instead of down it would not have come close.
"We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." – Wolfowitz, March 28, 2003.
http://zfacts.com/p/447.html - vofuse, on 11/05/2007, -5/+12That's what they get for not sending Chuck Norris.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -1/+8"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building...”
- George W. Bush, Oct. 11, 2000 - RogerStrong, on 11/05/2007, -0/+7>> And the Republicans think its the Democrats who tax and spend
You just figured this out?
Republican President Nixon ran up the debt. But when Carter failed to balance the budget (by a small amount), Republicans began to make much mention of "Democratic deficits" and proposed the Balanced Budget Amendment as a cure.
Then Reagan ran up record deficits far, far beyond anything before.
Bush Senior was elected on the campaign promise "Read my lips: no new taxes". Once elected he brought in new taxes and tax increases. Deficit spending continued.
Deficits were brought under control under Clinton, and for once there was actually a budget surplus. Still, the Republicans campaigned on fear-mongering that the Democrats would "tax and spend".
Bush Jr. came to power and ran up a record all-time deficit even *before* 9/11. Under Bush Jr, the US national debt has doubled.
This can't continue, of course. People who are teens and young adults now will be stuck with paying it down. They're being absolutely shafted by the baby boomers - Bdog2g2, on 11/04/2007, -0/+7Everyone prior to Petreaus.
- pkonink, on 11/04/2007, -0/+7There are financial conservatives of all parties and ideologies. Bill Clinton is famous for his financial conservatism.
- pintomp3, on 11/05/2007, -3/+10there is social conservatism and there is financial conservatism. most republicans are social conservatives. libertarians tend to be financial conservatives.
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -0/+7Maybe if Bush would have RTFM then our economy wouldn't be going to hell, thanks to billions being poured into Iraq. BTW, does everyone know that the US dollar is worth only $0.93 Canadian now? Thanks alot, Bush.
- pkonink, on 11/05/2007, -1/+7Agreed. I have no problem paying taxes as long as it isn't exhorbitent and it goes to important things like physical infrastructure, education and other important social programs (i.e. social security for elderly and the handicapped). But paying for bogus "war on terror" not to mention a "war on drugs?" Paying for corporate welfare? Paying so a few people can become even richer while they run our nation into the ground? No thanks.
- BrainRecall, on 11/04/2007, -1/+7Funny thing, most Republicans still identify themselves financial conservative as well, just that they haven't been since Regan.
- otatop, on 11/06/2007, -1/+7And we'd be in and out in 3 weeks.
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -1/+6WHAT OTHER SICK CRAP ARE CONS UP TO? Besides starting wars based on lies, bankrupting the U.S., burning our constitution, spying on us and screwing young boys. It is now more than obvious that the enemy we face is not some bearded extremist hiding out in a cave, but our own home grown traitors and criminals posing as our representatives in Washington, D.C.
- mbierman, on 11/04/2007, -2/+7http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-War/Cost ...
http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/016195.html - falseleftright, on 11/04/2007, -1/+6That's ok, we'll just borrow more money from China, no sweat.
- FluffyWolf, on 11/05/2007, -0/+5"Lawrence Lindsey, a White House economic adviser, was a bit more realistic, predicting that the cost could go as high as $200 billion, but President George W. Bush fired him in part for saying so."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/16/business/le ...
Ok, he was a bit of target too, but still 4 times closer than the White House estimation was after they had fired him. - inactive, on 11/05/2007, -1/+6YES OR NO ANSWER NEEDED FROM YOU PEDO CONS
Is having an extramarital affair with an adult woman the morally and legally equivalent to preying on underaged boys for sexual pleasure? - taquitohater, on 11/05/2007, -0/+5If we educate and keep our children healthy, then the terrorists win, WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE LEARN, damn all of you libtards!
/sarcasm - pkonink, on 11/04/2007, -0/+5Oh that pissed me off when I read about that. I'm getting so angry now just thinking about it. Another loss for common sense.
- FluffyWolf, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4Yes, that is the exception...though it will never happen unless you are Jack Bauer, or some other fictional character.
- Jexie, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4Haha wow, I didn't think anyone still believed there was actually such a thing as a war on terror anymore. Watch out if you ever get near the Smithsonian, they might never let you go.
- falseleftright, on 11/04/2007, -4/+8I'm positive I have heard a candidate say those exact words....can't remember his name though.
- mjhamilton, on 11/05/2007, -2/+6His name is Pon Raul, I think he is foreign. Smart guy.
- Bdog2g2, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4No, like any other government, they didnt' look too much beyond their own nose to give that estimate. I worked with the FDOT, and when it was time to budget for new road construction, they would just allocate about %10million just to say they have funding to continue with other parts of the project. After about 3 years, the cost had ballooned to 30-50 million. When the road is finally done it cost $150 million.
When they do the final project closeout they ask, "Why did it cost so much more?" And because they didn't actually do a budget or think the project through or even do proper data collection, they can't answer the question. Then the next project comes up, and it all repeats.
The problem is that government officials have long forgotten that the money they spend is theirs and the tax payers. The citizens have long forgotten that the government gets money from them. Ask your average citizen and they'll say they think the money is printed for the what's needed. - Mardala, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4and the toll would hitting vietnam numbers had body armor not been in place. You also have to think of the large number wounded who for the most part are left out of the media.
- williamdyer, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4So, Mr. Cheney08... You FOUND the WMDs? Hahahahahaha Now pull the other one.
- inactive, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4Not my predictions
- RogerStrong, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4Bush ran up an all-time record deficit *BEFORE* 9/11.
- pintomp3, on 11/05/2007, -2/+6that's a bogus argument. people are pro-abortion rights, not pro-abortion.
- Mardala, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4? When terrorists are dropping nukes on our country? Wow what sort of ignorant bubble land do you live in? Ooooh I am scared of the boogeyman. We are more likely to have a major recession and a financial crisis in this country than to have a nuclear bomb dropped on our soil. Go ruin your own lives you NeoCon piece of *****.
- pintomp3, on 11/04/2007, -1/+4reagan wasn't a financial conservative, he just didn't want money to be spent on the people. just look at the national debt while he was in office.
- williamdyer, on 11/06/2007, -0/+3Reagan actually WON the Cold War. The neocon Israel Lobby ***** spent the peace dividend AND our kids' life savings on this stupid failure of a war. Bush and his crew should be turned over to the Hague court to be tried for torturing. Then we should cut off all aid to Israel and not turn even consider turning it back on until the war debt is paid. And we should demand immediate payment of all debt by Israel.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -0/+3???
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is