- This topic has 22 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
The united states ivasion on Iraq has been much critisized as bringing in it’s wake unlimited carnage and anarchy.
Yet a recent BBC article finnally suggests otherwise. Since the invasion only eight years ago, Iraq’s population has risen from 25 million people to an unbelievable 33m. now do the math yourself.
Demographers point out that large famiies are the norm in Iraq, however during Saddam’s reign infant mortality was estimated to be 0.5, since the invasion however, there is much better access to healthcare. Births however are not able to account for such tremendous population growth. there has obviously also been considerable gain to the average life expentancy, both due to healthcare, and the fact that no longer is every third person killed prematurely for conspiring against the government.
End of story, however, it appears that there was at least major achievement as a result of the invasion.
Maybe there are 8 million al queda fighters who came from other counties
Ends do not justify the means.
Who said anything about means?
I was just pointing out that the means (invading a country that had not attacked the US and killing over 100,000 civilians) are not justified by the supposed positive outcomes (as stated by the OP).
Dont forget these effects
1. Immediate and permanent increase to oil prices (from a stable $30 per barrel)
2. Wild amounts of debt to fund the invasion
3. Rampant inflation due to printing money to fund the debt
4. Cheap money enables short term incentive induced sub prime lending
5. Near total collapse of US economy less than 6 years later.
The US war in Iraq was undertaken to protect the US from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. It turns out that there were no such weapons. Even if we assume that the opening poster’s assessment of the net effects of the US invasion are correct (which is doubtful), the cost of those benefits is horrendously high, and immeasurable for the US soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen/women who were injured or killed in the effort.
“Rampant inflation due to printing money to fund the debt”
That has not happened.
In the ten years after the Iraq war, consumer prices increased 26%.
In the ten years prior to the Iraq war, consumer prices increased 28%.
“Rampant inflation due to printing money to fund the debt”
That has not happened.
In the ten years after the Iraq war, consumer prices increased 26%.
In the ten years prior to the Iraq war, consumer prices increased 28%.
Science is so wonderful, you can get such wholesome returns of conjecture with such a limited investment of fact. (paraphrased from Mark Twain)
1. What is the inflation rate historically?
2. Might there have been other inflationary pressure during those previous 10 years which was removed?
You can’t just go making conclusions on two pieces of data. It isn’t much better than the poster you are responding to who only had one piece.
Charliehall,
No one is denying that by CPI standards there has been no unusual inflation. However, no one is admitting that CPI is an effective way to measure inflation. Im not going to bother listing criticisms of CPI as a measure of inflation because you can find them easily yourself. But its not in the slightest bit relevant to the point I made here.
The inflation has been caused by endless printing of new money and open market operations. When that didnt accomplish its goal, they moved on to printing money and quantitative easing. All of that money ended up in the hands of those who needed it the least, and no trickle down has occurred to date. Nor will it ever. So no surprise that the basket of goods hasnt increased by a shocking amount, since the new money was not distributed into the hands of those who would use it to compete for goods. The rich (corporations) got richer while the average person stayed the same. This is not your 1970s style inflation although it seemed like it at first.
The inflation has occurred in the stock markets and in the treasuries of companies with large investable assets. All that extra printed money is sitting in “surplus” accounts and is not being spent. It is propping up company valuations and share prices. What remains to be seen is what will happen after they pulled the plug on QE. Maybe it will even register on your sacred CPI at some point.
Re DASH2’s 3rd post: As for what is available on the “BBC,” could you be more specific? Otherwise, I will wind up watching old Monty Python skits.
As for your suggestion that Al Queda moved the WMD’s before the US could find them, that is idle speculation. And if they were moved, where did they go, and why were they not used in the last 10 years? And I am not sure that it was the CIA who reached an erroneous conclusion about WMD’s. I think it was their political bosses, e.g., Dick Cheney, who encouraged the CIA to interpret the raw intelligence to fit with his political schemes.
Exactly what positive effects the invasion had for the Iraqi people is hard to say. You point to their increased birth rate, but that might have happened anyway. And even if the overall impact of the invasion was positive (which I doubt), I do not think it was a wise use of my (or your, or other American taxpayers’) money, or the lives and limbs of American armed forces personnel.
“It isn’t much better than the poster you are responding to “
The poster I was responding to made a claim and did not back it up. I debunked it with real statistics. Do you have any statistics to show that inflation is “rampant”?
“What is the inflation rate historically?”
2003-2013: 26%
1993-2003: 28%
1983-1993: 47%
1973-1983: 126%
1963-1973: 42%
1953-1963: 15%
1943-1953: 55%
1933-1943: 37%
“Might there have been other inflationary pressure during those previous 10 years which was removed?”
Yes, the economic crash so destroyed the economy that we had two years of DEflation, which is far worse (and far more difficult to deal with) than INflation.
“However, no one is admitting that CPI is an effective way to measure inflation.”
Only the 314 million Americans who face consumer prices think that it is effective.
But fine, the GDP deflator may well be better. Here are its historical rates:
2003-2013: 23%
1993-2003: 20%
1983-1993: 35%
1973-1983: 103%
1963-1973: 47%
1953-1963: 19%
“The inflation has been caused “
As the statistics show, there is no inflation, at least nothing more than has been seen for decades.
“All of that money ended up in the hands of those who needed it the least, and no trickle down has occurred to date. Nor will it ever.”
Nice to see someone else here admitting that the Republican “trickle-down” theory doesn’t work. And unfortunately the Republicans in Congress won’t allow anything else to be enacted.
“quantitative easing”
QE is exactly what Milton Friedman recommended to Japan in almost identical circumstances in the 1990s.
“This is not your 1970s style inflation although it seemed like it at first.”
There was actual DEflation at the beginning of Obama’s term, as indicated above. (It ended earlier by the GDP deflator, but it was there.)
“You can’t just go making conclusions on two pieces of data.”
If the moderators permit, I could give the links to the entire time series of CPI and GDP deflator data. I did not misrepresent them.
” It isn’t much better than the poster you are responding to who only had one piece.”
No, he offered no data at all.
You can provide some key terms so that someone interested can search for it, including the name of the website. -100
Can you also give links to the DJIA time series? How about to the time series showing the combined wealth of America’s wealthiest families? Those are all easy to find too. So I’m not sure why you are clinging to CPI after I made it clear I have no argument there. CPI would only increase if every average person has more money to spend, and the printed money never made it to the average person. There is too much money chasing NO goods.
“1. Immediate and permanent increase to oil prices (from a stable $30 per barrel)”
Surely you jest. Oil prices have swung wildly since 1973. Google “historical oil prices.”
charliehall’s comparative 10 year rate of inflation chart for the last 60 years shows the ’03-’13 decade to have one of the lowest inflation rates from all those decades.
I typed “GDP deflator historical data” and found a site at the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank with a time series going back to 1947.
Typing “CPI historical” to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics web site gets you numerous links, one of which gives you the complete time series of consumer price index data from 1913 to the present.
Those were my sources.
“Immediate and permanent increase to oil prices (from a stable $30 per barrel)”
As yehudayona points out, oil prices have been anything but stable for over 40 years. But in fact oil prices have not been as low as $30/bbl. since late 2003. (My source is the US Department of Energy Energy Information Administration.) This is one that might well be able to be blamed on the Iraq war, which ironically was supposed to result in cheaper oil.
It should be noted that oil prices are highly dependent on the state of the economy. They reached $145/bbl. in July 2008, then plummeted to $30/bbl. by December. Gasoline prices had a similar plummet, from $3.41/gal. to $0.79/gal. on the New York spot market. Obamahaters here criticize Obama for high gasoline prices; do they really want to return the economy to the way it was in December 2008?
“Can you also give links to the DJIA time series? How about to the time series showing the combined wealth of America’s wealthiest families? “
Why don’t you look for yourself? I’m not your research assistant! The stock market has indeed boomed, proving that Obama is the most incompetent socialist in history.
“So I’m not sure why you are clinging to CPI after I made it clear I have no argument there.”
I didn’t cling to the CPI; I gave you the GDP deflator. You have presented no data that indicates that inflation is a problem.
“There is too much money chasing NO goods.”
There isn’t a shortage of goods, as any trip to a shopping mall will confirm. And most Americans would disagree about there being too much money.
Everyone’s missing the point.
Iraq was invaded to rid the world of a cruel dictator. We thought then that he had stockpiles of WMD and could attack Israel with chemical weapons with only 47 minutes notice. It’s not as if he never tried to attack Israel before.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but faced with that reality, they had to go in and remove him.
I am not attacking Obama, relax. No one mentioned Obama except you. Your responses to me are full of strawman arguments. We can discuss Obama in another thread if you like. The Iraq war was a decision made by President Bush.
As yehudayona points out, oil prices have been anything but stable for over 40 years.
Oil prices historically were very stable up until the Yom Kippur war, and returned to stability at the end of the Iran/Iraq war. Then from around 1988 until 2003 the price of oil stayed stable and fluctuated only in the $20-$30 range. The next period of instability started with the US invasion of Iraq. It seems that oil prices have stabilized again at this point, but at 3-4x the previous threshhold (around $100 per barrel). That is a negative consequence of the Iraq invasion in my opinion.
I said there is too much money chasing no goods and I thought you’d understand. Maybe I should have worded it as there is too much money NOT chasing goods. I thought it sounded better the first way. We definitely agree that most Americans do not think there is too much money; that was my original point. There is in fact too much money, but most Americans are not seeing it because it stayed at the top. I don’t know any way to make it clearer to you that this is the type of monetary inflation I am trying to talk about. Unless you are being deliberately defensive I would have thought you and I see eye to eye on this topic.
I didn’t cling to the CPI; I gave you the GDP deflator. You have presented no data that indicates that inflation is a problem.
I think this part of our disagreement is fairly ironic. If we were discussing Global Warming and someone presented data showing that we have had much colder winters recently (and less blazing summers), you would dismiss the data as not seeing the bigger picture. Well, I contend the same to you in this argument. Bringing me CPI figures to prove that no inflation is occurring is certainly missing the big picture. To tell me that you’ve “debunked” the inflationary effects of OMO buybacks and QE by showing me CPI is as laughable as me telling you I’ve “debunked” global warming by showing you NYC weather records.
And in case anyone has the gall to say TL;DR, do you have any idea how long it takes to type all this on a phone with OA? 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.