Gostaria de reagir a esta mensagem? Crie uma conta em poucos cliques ou inicie sessão para continuar.


 
InícioInício  ProcurarProcurar  Últimas imagensÚltimas imagens  RegistarRegistar  EntrarEntrar  

 

 A invasão do iraque

Ir para baixo 
AutorMensagem
Lech Walesa

Lech Walesa


Mensagens : 452
Data de inscrição : 30/01/2008

A invasão do iraque Empty
MensagemAssunto: A invasão do iraque   A invasão do iraque EmptyQua Mar 19, 2008 6:54 pm

Invading Iraq
Eyeing the wages of war
Mar 13th 2008
From The Economist print edition



Two economists take an unflinching look at the costs of invading Iraq
SUPPOSE that, five years ago, George Bush had asked every American household
to stump up $25,000 to pay for an imminent war on Iraq. How would they have
responded?
That money, suitably husbanded, would have paid for arming, provisioning and
remunerating the troops; treating the wounded; and restoring the army's
strength in the aftermath. It would have paid just compensation for the death
and injury of American servicemen and contractors, and it would have covered
America's outlays on reconstruction. It would also have allowed America to
subsidise the price of oil by $10 a barrel—offsetting the disruption to Iraq's
supply.
Mr Bush never asked, of course. But this hefty sum is nonetheless just part of the
toll the war may take on America by the time it is over, according to a new book
by Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel prize-winner in economics, and Linda Bilmes, a budget
and public finance expert at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
How do the authors arrive at the $3 trillion figure of the title, and the still bigger
numbers they report inside? To the administration's own requests for money they
add other costs to the taxpayer that either appear elsewhere in the budget (such
as the bonuses required to attract recruits put off by the war) or do not yet appear at all (such as the
future disability claims of wounded veterans). They put a dollar figure on the American lives lost or
damaged by debilitating injury. And they also estimate the damage the war has done to the American
economy, by raising the price of oil and diverting spending from domestic investment to foreign
adventures.
Along the way, they accuse the administration of both mortgaging the nation's future and short-changing
the troops and of deceiving the public and deluding itself. The administration still treats a five-year war
as an unforeseen contingency to be paid for by an extra, emergency appropriation outside its regular
budget request. And it has indulged in false economies that shave the cash requirements of the war
today—by, for example, hesitating to purchase mine-resistant vehicles—only to store up much bigger
AP
The Three Trillion
Dollar War: The
True Cost of the
Iraq Conflict
By Joseph E. Stiglitz and
Linda J. Bilmes
Norton; 311 pages;
$22.95. Allen Lane; £20
Buy it at
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
burdens for the future, such as the cost of caring for veterans injured by roadside bombs.
Critics have questioned some of the authors' estimates, since these were first rehearsed in an academic
paper in 2006. The head of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, for example, thinks that paper
overestimated the burden of brain injuries, overstated the cost of replacing munitions and equipment,
and misattributed other military expenses. But the authors have taken pains to answer those quibbles,
and they disclose their sources so that readers can add or subtract as they see fit.
They go on to pursue the war's trail through every twist and turn of the macroeconomic labyrinth. Here,
their reasoning is a bit too ingenious. They argue, for example, that the government's spending abroad
prevented it from giving America a needed fiscal boost at home. Even if you believe America has suffered
from a shortfall of demand in the past five years, surely the blame cannot be pinned on the Iraq war. It
must lie instead with the Federal Reserve, which is supposed to maintain full employment as best it can.
Indeed, what is remarkable is how small a macroeconomic price America has paid for its adventure. Not
only has the war been financed by borrowing rather than taxes, but also the borrowing has been dirt
cheap. Neo-imperialists worry that America has the responsibilities of a global superpower, but an
electorate unwilling to shoulder them. For better or worse, though, the combination of volunteer soldiers,
hired guns and Asian creditors has lightened the load.
Unlike some other economists, Mr Stiglitz and Ms Bilmes do not weigh the cost of the war against the
obvious counterfactual: the cost of containing Saddam Hussein. (They do subtract the cost of enforcing
the no-fly zones over the country). Keeping a big force in the region—big enough to cow the dictator into
letting weapons inspectors do their job—would not have been cheap, although with hindsight the strategy
looks like a bargain. Nor do they pay much attention to the benefits of the invasion, however meagre.
For example, the world now knows for sure that Saddam will never lay his hands on weapons of mass
destruction. That knowledge may not be worth $3 trillion. But it is surely worth something.
The book mixes the patience of an auditor with the passion of a polemicist; it combines forensic
intelligence with prosecutorial zeal. This reviewer responded more to its quieter virtues. As the authors
say, the book is not just about the big number on the cover. More importantly, “by examining the costs,
we come to understand better the implications of the war.”
Great powers almost never pay for their wars up front. Even in America's war of independence, the
revolutionaries printed money to finance their campaign. But a government contemplating war should
surely provide a credible advance estimate of the final bill, akin to what Mr Stiglitz and Ms Bilmes have
done. If they cannot, it is a good sign they have not fully weighed the implications of their venture. If so,
perhaps they should not undertake it at all.


The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict.
By Joseph E. Stiglitz and Linda J. Bilmes.
Norton; 311 pages; $22.95. Allen Lane; £20
Copyright © 2008 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.
Ir para o topo Ir para baixo
Convidad
Convidado




A invasão do iraque Empty
MensagemAssunto: Re: A invasão do iraque   A invasão do iraque EmptyQua Mar 19, 2008 7:06 pm

It doesn,t bother me!!!

GOD BLESS GEORGE W. BUSH!!
Ir para o topo Ir para baixo
 
A invasão do iraque
Ir para o topo 
Página 1 de 1
 Tópicos semelhantes
-
» Análise: Invasão do Iraque mudou balanço de forças no Orient
» Invasão de zonas habitacionais ....
» Russos Invasão pacifista em Portugal
» Os tesouros do Iraque
» Mortos no Iraque

Permissões neste sub-fórumNão podes responder a tópicos
 :: Economia-
Ir para: