U.S. lost track of 9 Billion dollars in Iraq

#2
#2
So, they have lost track of less than .5%? That is not enough to make a material difference.
 
#3
#3
I have found out where the cash went while driving through WVa. It was used to build the Robert Byrd Ball of Twine, and the Robert Byrd Largest Frying Pan in the World.
 
#4
#4
When one steps back and looks at the amount of money the government is spending over there. This is akin to giving a cashier two $20 bills to pay for an item that cost $39.76, and letting the cashier keep the change.
 
#5
#5
granted, this is a drop in the bucket, but it is taxpayer money. 9 billion would buy 4 B-2 Stealth bombers.
 
#7
#7
I don't feel like giving lazy Americans even more opportunities to blow. I, however, do not mind providing opportunity and chance to people who have lived two generations under a cruel dictator.
 
#8
#8
oklavol said:
What the U.S. could do with the 145 Billion being spent on the Iraq war
Click to expand...

You know as well as I do that the money would have just been earmarked for some other bureaucratic purpose that would most likely be inefficient.
 
#9
#9
MG1968 said:
granted, this is a drop in the bucket, but it is taxpayer money. 9 billion would buy 4 B-2 Stealth bombers.
Click to expand...
Yes, and for our government to assure that it accounts for every last penny, it would probably cost in the ballpark of $30B-$40B. I will once again state that I could give a rat's *ss that the U.S. cannot account for chump change.
 
#10
#10
Definitely a case of relative large numbers. I'd bet that you could look at any big budget item that you wanted to denigrate and do a story like this.
 
#11
#11
therealUT said:
I don't feel like giving lazy Americans even more opportunities to blow. I, however, do not mind providing opportunity and chance to people who have lived two generations under a cruel dictator.
Click to expand...
I'm on your side here, but the arguments you're floating are just crazy.

OK with $9 billion gone and justifying the expense by implying that we don't have better places to spend the money? Makes you sound idiotic and I know that isn't the case.
 
#12
#12
BigPapaVol said:
I'm on your side here, but the arguments you're floating are just crazy.

OK with $9 billion gone and justifying the expense by implying that we don't have better places to spend the money? Makes you sound idiotic and I know that isn't the case.
Click to expand...
We do not have better places to spend the money on in the current welfare state of America. I would argue that the people who will be outraged by this story (the left) are out at most $2B of the $9B. I would say that the majority of the people who pay the overwhelming bulk of the taxes in this country are not phased by this "discovery."
 
#13
#13
therealUT said:
We do not have better places to spend the money on in the current welfare state of America. I would argue that the people who will be outraged by this story (the left) are out at most $2B of the $9B. I would say that the majority of the people who pay the overwhelming bulk of the taxes in this country are not phased by this "discovery."
Click to expand...

How about spending it on building biodiesel and ethanol plants in the U.S.? How about spending on developing the huge oil shale reserves in Utah into petroleum. We wouldn't need Arab oil.
 
#14
#14
oklavol said:
How about spending it on building biodiesel and ethanol plants in the U.S.? How about spending on developing the huge oil shale reserves in Utah into petroleum. We wouldn't need Arab oil.
Click to expand...

only problem there is that the environmental lobby would have to be placated in some way, effectively using up half of that 9 billion dollars.

I'd say increase tax cuts by 9 billion.
 
#15
#15
oklavol said:
How about spending it on building biodiesel and ethanol plants in the U.S.? How about spending on developing the huge oil shale reserves in Utah into petroleum. We wouldn't need Arab oil.
Click to expand...
I believe that the private sector should develop those products, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.
 
#16
#16
therealUT said:
I believe that the private sector should develop those products, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.
Click to expand...

Its not in the national interest to develop alternative sources of fuel but it is in the national interest to go nation building in Iraq?
 
#17
#17
oklavol said:
Its not in the national interest to develop alternative sources of fuel but it is in the national interest to go nation building in Iraq?
Click to expand...
It is not in the national interest to develop any consumer products. Never will be, in my opinion. Also, I don't believe it is in the national interest to go nation building. I believe it is in the best interest of humanity to fight for liberty in countries where you believe you can achieve it.
 
#18
#18
The government certainly has a role to play in developing alternative fuels but it is at the basic research level (e.g. Oak Ridge National Lab).

I don't think the govt. should be building/operating final product plants.

Basic research funding is necessary since the market doesn't value that spending - the risk/reward equation is too skewed towards risk. However, the market will take scientific innovations and turn them into commercial ventures
 
#19
#19
therealUT said:
We do not have better places to spend the money on in the current welfare state of America. I would argue that the people who will be outraged by this story (the left) are out at most $2B of the $9B. I would say that the majority of the people who pay the overwhelming bulk of the taxes in this country are not phased by this "discovery."
Click to expand...
you would be frickin' wrong about those paying the big tax bills. In fact, I'd bet most of them hammer their accountants into the ground.
 
#20
#20
volinbham said:
The government certainly has a role to play in developing alternative fuels but it is at the basic research level (e.g. Oak Ridge National Lab).

I don't think the govt. should be building/operating final product plants.

Basic research funding is necessary since the market doesn't value that spending - the risk/reward equation is too skewed towards risk. However, the market will take scientific innovations and turn them into commercial ventures
Click to expand...

Oil companies are not going to make an investment in biodeisel or ethanol production or technology when they are making more money then they ever have with oil. Oil is something everyone has to have, whatever they charge people will pay cause they have no choice.

Supply and demand and free enterprise works best when the consumer has a choice. Now there is no alternative. Not to mention the freedom this country would have if it was not dependent on foreign oil. Its more in the national interest then nation building in Iraq.

There is no company with enough resources to compete against oil companies with the production of ethanol and biodiesel.

Its already been done in Brazil why cant we use their model and do it here? Granted they used sugar, the U.S. would probably use corn.
 
#21
#21
therealUT said:
It is not in the national interest to develop any consumer products. Never will be, in my opinion. Also, I don't believe it is in the national interest to go nation building. I believe it is in the best interest of humanity to fight for liberty in countries where you believe you can achieve it.
Click to expand...

Wow, America has a lot of work to do, in your mind!

War forever, everybody!
 
#22
#22
BigPapaVol said:
you would be frickin' wrong about those paying the big tax bills. In fact, I'd bet most of them hammer their accountants into the ground.
Click to expand...
Go research the tax statistics. Then try to tell me I am wrong about who bears the tax burden in the US.
 
#23
#23
oklavol said:
Its not in the national interest to develop alternative sources of fuel but it is in the national interest to go nation building in Iraq?
Click to expand...

Nation building is exactly what we did after WWII. World is a better place for it overall. Same will happen here. You are just to close to the forest to see the trees.
 
#24
#24
therealUT said:
Go research the tax statistics. Then try to tell me I am wrong about who bears the tax burden in the US.
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing about who bears the burden. I'm saying those that bear the burden wholeheartedly care that we would be so frivolous as to piss away $9 Billion and then write it off as rounding error. Many of them pay outsized taxes because they have managed down to the dime in their corporate lives.
 
#25
#25
hohenfelsvol said:
Nation building is exactly what we did after WWII. World is a better place for it overall. Same will happen here. You are just to close to the forest to see the trees.
Click to expand...
alternative fuel precludes the need to nation build anywhere in the Middle East
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top