Would you believe it?
According to Lou Dobbs this evening an a gov't employee that has studied comprehensive immigration reform ... the amount of money it will cost to offer Medicaid, social security, etc for those granted amnesty will cost 2.5 to 3 trillion dollars.
Ouch!
Amnesty Cost > Iraq War Cost
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 19611
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
-
millerm277
- Postaholic
- Posts: 2580
- Joined: Nov 3rd, '06, 09:43
- Location: NH
Sounds right, but you also have to remember....those people will now be paying taxes, which should at least partially offset that cost, and that really isn't that much over a period of say, 20 years.
However, I don't think any amnesty should be granted until we have a competent border patrol that patrols the entire border, and has a proper fence across the entire thing.
However, I don't think any amnesty should be granted until we have a competent border patrol that patrols the entire border, and has a proper fence across the entire thing.
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 19611
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
How would you make sure all 12-20 million illegals pay into the system? I guess they wouldn't get benefits unless they paid into the system.millerm277 wrote:Sounds right, but you also have to remember....those people will now be paying taxes, which should at least partially offset that cost, and that really isn't that much over a period of say, 20 years.
I was REALLY surprised by this number.
Agreed.millerm277 wrote:However, I don't think any amnesty should be granted until we have a competent border patrol that patrols the entire border, and has a proper fence across the entire thing.
In most cases when they throw these figures out, they are preliminary and start up costs. Over time these costs rise and remain an anual burdon on the tax payer. Also, the income of these undocumented (ILLEGALS) is nothing compared to the cost of allowing them to use our systems.
MUST STOP POSTING ! MUST STOP POSTING !
Shut up and Ski!
Why's Everybody Always Pickin on Me?
Shut up and Ski!
Why's Everybody Always Pickin on Me?
Your pointless post sent me down memory lane (see below). Keep in mind we're approaching $500 Billion in costs for the war, with no end in sight. A Nobel laureate in Economics has estimated the final number could surpass $2 Trillion. I mean they fired the fukking guy who estimated $200 Billion!!!
I think the best plan of action would be for this Administration to do nothing new until the unmercilessly distant conclusion of their raping and pillaging of this country's soul and standing in the world.
But that's just me.
------------------------------------------
What would war with Iraq cost?
Bush: Attack by Iraq 'would cripple' economy
From Dana Bash
CNN Washington Bureau
Thursday, January 2, 2003 Posted: 9:08 AM EST (1408 GMT)
Bush: "This economy cannot afford to stand an attack."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is downplaying published reports of an estimated $50 billion to $60 billion price tag for a war with Iraq, saying it is "impossible" to estimate the cost at this time.
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday that such a conflict could cost $50 billion to $60 billion -- the price tag of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
But Trent Duffy, an OMB spokesman, said Daniels did not intend to imply in the Times interview that $50 billion to $60 billion was a hard White House estimate.
"He said it could -- could -- be $60 billion," Duffy said. "It is impossible to know what any military campaign would ultimately cost. The only cost estimate we know of in this arena is the Persian Gulf War, and that was a $60 billion event."
Duffy also was careful to caution that President Bush had not made a decision to use military force against Saddam's regime.
Bush stressed that point in comments to reporters on Tuesday. "I want to remind people that Saddam Hussein, the choice is his to make as to whether or not the Iraqi situation [is] resolved peacefully. ... I hope we're not headed to war in Iraq," he said.
Fielding questions about the tensions with Iraq and North Korea, Bush also said an attack by by Saddam Hussein or a terrorist ally "would cripple our economy." (Full story)
"This economy cannot afford to stand an attack," Bush said. "And I'm going to protect the American people. The economy's strong. It's resilient. Obviously, so long as somebody's looking for work, we've got to continue to make it strong and resilient."
'No one knows how much it will cost'
In September, Daniels disputed an estimate by Bush economic adviser Larry Lindsey -- who has since left the White House -- that war with Iraq could cost $200 billion.
Daniels said he believes Lindsey's estimate was "the upper end of a hypothetical," Duffy said.
Congressional Democrats this past fall estimated the cost of a military attack against Iraq around $93 billion.
But they noted that the figure did not include costs such as U.S. peacekeeping efforts, foreign assistance or loan forgiveness, or the economic impact should an oil crisis ensue.
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, the outgoing Senate Budget Committee chairman, issued a statement Tuesday saying "the reality is no one knows how much it will cost us to wage war with Iraq."
"Mitch Daniels' $50 billion to $60 billion estimate is as viable as Larry Lindsey's $100 billion to $200 billion estimate in September. So much depends on the duration and type of combat forces as well as the presence, duration and size of a peacekeeping force," Conrad said.
Conrad also said that "despite this potential new expense, the Bush administration continues with its ill-fated economic policy of more tax cuts for the wealthy, bigger deficits for the American people and growing debt for our children and grandchildren."
The cost of the Persian Gulf war was shared by many countries in the U.S.-led coalition against Saddam. It is unclear how many nations would pick up some of the cost of another campaign.
I think the best plan of action would be for this Administration to do nothing new until the unmercilessly distant conclusion of their raping and pillaging of this country's soul and standing in the world.
But that's just me.
------------------------------------------
What would war with Iraq cost?
Bush: Attack by Iraq 'would cripple' economy
From Dana Bash
CNN Washington Bureau
Thursday, January 2, 2003 Posted: 9:08 AM EST (1408 GMT)
Bush: "This economy cannot afford to stand an attack."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is downplaying published reports of an estimated $50 billion to $60 billion price tag for a war with Iraq, saying it is "impossible" to estimate the cost at this time.
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday that such a conflict could cost $50 billion to $60 billion -- the price tag of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
But Trent Duffy, an OMB spokesman, said Daniels did not intend to imply in the Times interview that $50 billion to $60 billion was a hard White House estimate.
"He said it could -- could -- be $60 billion," Duffy said. "It is impossible to know what any military campaign would ultimately cost. The only cost estimate we know of in this arena is the Persian Gulf War, and that was a $60 billion event."
Duffy also was careful to caution that President Bush had not made a decision to use military force against Saddam's regime.
Bush stressed that point in comments to reporters on Tuesday. "I want to remind people that Saddam Hussein, the choice is his to make as to whether or not the Iraqi situation [is] resolved peacefully. ... I hope we're not headed to war in Iraq," he said.
Fielding questions about the tensions with Iraq and North Korea, Bush also said an attack by by Saddam Hussein or a terrorist ally "would cripple our economy." (Full story)
"This economy cannot afford to stand an attack," Bush said. "And I'm going to protect the American people. The economy's strong. It's resilient. Obviously, so long as somebody's looking for work, we've got to continue to make it strong and resilient."
'No one knows how much it will cost'
In September, Daniels disputed an estimate by Bush economic adviser Larry Lindsey -- who has since left the White House -- that war with Iraq could cost $200 billion.
Daniels said he believes Lindsey's estimate was "the upper end of a hypothetical," Duffy said.
Congressional Democrats this past fall estimated the cost of a military attack against Iraq around $93 billion.
But they noted that the figure did not include costs such as U.S. peacekeeping efforts, foreign assistance or loan forgiveness, or the economic impact should an oil crisis ensue.
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, the outgoing Senate Budget Committee chairman, issued a statement Tuesday saying "the reality is no one knows how much it will cost us to wage war with Iraq."
"Mitch Daniels' $50 billion to $60 billion estimate is as viable as Larry Lindsey's $100 billion to $200 billion estimate in September. So much depends on the duration and type of combat forces as well as the presence, duration and size of a peacekeeping force," Conrad said.
Conrad also said that "despite this potential new expense, the Bush administration continues with its ill-fated economic policy of more tax cuts for the wealthy, bigger deficits for the American people and growing debt for our children and grandchildren."
The cost of the Persian Gulf war was shared by many countries in the U.S.-led coalition against Saddam. It is unclear how many nations would pick up some of the cost of another campaign.
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 19611
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
Even more striking is that your own party was downplaying the cost(s) of the war!
Wasn't a pointless post, I just thought it was interesting amnesty could cost more then the war. I'm concerned about all large costs and debt, not just the war or just amnesty, but both.
IMHO, this war will extend until the next President is elected (you see Hilary trying desperately to end it now because she wouldn't know how to end it if she was in-charge), probably someone from your party, then we'll really see how empty many words of the Democrat party can be.
We should be moving-out of Iraq today, but there is no need to make the date or our intentions known to others, IMO.
Wasn't a pointless post, I just thought it was interesting amnesty could cost more then the war. I'm concerned about all large costs and debt, not just the war or just amnesty, but both.
IMHO, this war will extend until the next President is elected (you see Hilary trying desperately to end it now because she wouldn't know how to end it if she was in-charge), probably someone from your party, then we'll really see how empty many words of the Democrat party can be.
We should be moving-out of Iraq today, but there is no need to make the date or our intentions known to others, IMO.