Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Passing the Cost of War On To Future Generations


Democrats in the house are now 'concerned' that the $150 billion cost of the Iraq War will be passed on to future generations. Well, that's one way to look at it...

The Associated Press wrote today that:

Three senior House Democrats proposed an income tax surcharge Tuesday to finance the approximately $150 billion annual cost of operations in Iraq, saying it is unfair to pass the cost of the war on to future generations.

The plan, unveiled by Reps. David Obey, D-Wis., John Murtha, D-Pa., and Jim McGovern, D-Mass., would require low- and middle-income taxpayers to add 2 percent to their tax bill. Wealthier people would add a 12 to 15 percent surcharge, Obey said.


Since when did "pass[ing] the cost of [anything]
on to future generations" stop anybody in Congress, with the exception of a handful of exemplary leaders, such as Ron Paul? We're certainly passing the cost of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid on to future generations.

But that's not all. The tax surcharge these congress people are proposing is another experiment in the socialist wealth collection shell game. If you don't make much money, you only pay 2%, but that's okay that we're suckering you poor people, because guess what? The rich SOBs have to pay EVEN MORE!!!

Despite how one may feel about the way we got into Iraq, one of the Constitutional requirements of the federal government is to provide for a defense of the country. Until these loons in the Senate and the House can figure out a way to get us out of this mess, I think there are better ways to pay for the war than a snide tax increase.

How about cutting spending in the myriad areas that they have no constitutional authority over?

9 comments:

rmwarnick said...

I don't know where that $150 billion figure comes from. If you count all the costs, the Iraq fiasco is going to cost $2 trillion-- roughly the cost of World War II in today's dollars.

Right now, the Bush administration is borrowing the money from Japan ($600 billion so far) and China ($400 billion).

I wish that Congress would raise taxes to pay for the war, that would actually be the responsible thing to do. But the Democratic leadership doesn't have the nerve.

rmwarnick said...

One more thing, which I'm sure Frank is aware of though he doesn't mention it. The National Debt is well over $9 trillion, and increasing by $1.51 billion per day.

I'm old enough to remember when Republicans used to be concerned about the National Debt. Now it goes down during Democratic administrations, and up --way up-- when Republicans are in the White House.

Frank Staheli said...

Richard,

You need to read more closely. Either that, or don't interpret what I have to say. First of all, the way to take care of the cost of the Iraq war is to end it.

Second of all, the debt has reached crisis proportions, and the way to reduce the debt is to return government to its proper role.

Far greater than our military budget is the problem that FDR gave us--regulation and faux redemption. Medicare, medicaid, and social security (whose unfunded obligations now total 1.5 times our current debt.)

rmwarnick said...

Just don't blame Democrats. President Clinton, whatever his faults, balanced the budget. Bush 43 promptly unbalanced it again, two years before before he invaded Iraq.

Frank Staheli said...

You are absolutely correct. I couldn't agree with you more. Clinton did a great job of getting rid of the deficit, and Bush came along and ruined it.

(But then again, a president can't create deficits all by himself...)

Anonymous said...

Balancing the budget during the Clinton years was as easy as making money in the stock market in the Clinton years--anyone could do it. Anyone who compares the Bush and Clinton budgets not only has no grasp on reality, but needs to think a wee bit more.

Frank Staheli said...

You may be right. Clinton seemed to be fiscally responsible, but it may just have been that the Republican congress was. Congress is as much to blame for excess spending (maybe more so) than the President.

Tax revenues right now actually seem to be way up. Were it not for the extra costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, we might not have a deficit this year.

Pam said...

One of my fellow authors put up a blog post about the cost of war. It fits nicely with some of the points that you have made here, so, I thought I'd direct you to it... at EverydayCitizen.com .... she calls the post:
Economists Explain: Bush Destroyed Our American Dream and it's at this address:
http://www.everydaycitizen.com/2007/11/his_war_costs_much_more_than_w.html

Love your blog,
Nora

Anonymous said...

Great blog, great information
rob
Xango Juice