Would $85 billion help the American elderly with their fuel costs?

Question

The US government spent $85billion between 2003 and 2007 on contractors for services in support of the Iraq war and reconstruction, a report says.

And by the end of 2008, spending is likely to top $100billion a review by the Congressional Budget Office found.

Thats 85,000,000,000 dollars.

Actually you could have given a quarter of the entire US population $1000 each to help them with their fuel and higher living costs to get them through the economic problems.

Here's a link to the report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7557995.stm

Answer 1

That would just about cover the increase in the UK, where we pay the proper price for fuel not the low cost that you do in the States. When you pay 10 dollers a gallon then start to complain.

Answer 2

It would help all the worlds elderly, not just the Americans.

The way the world is run makes me feel quite sick sometimes.

Answer 3

I read something a while ago that said if you used all the money spent on military equipment etc. worldwide you could cure world poverty. But no, we like fighting better apparently.

Answer 4

Why elderly?   young people have fuel costs too.    

Answer 5

Everybody has there own little schemes for spending the Government's taxes. The USA broke Iraq, now it's got to fix it.

My scheme? Cut taxes then the Government won't have so much money to throw about.

Answer 6

US defence spending policy is simply staggering.

Prior to the Iraq War, the annual increase (just the increase) in US 'defence' spending was greater than the entire military budget for the next three countries in the annual table of defence spending.

George W has decided that the sums you speak of are not to be paid (like previous wars) by taxes on this generation, it's to be paid for by borrowing and then repaid by future generations (under other presidents).

The reality is that the military-industrial complex has sch a vice-like grip on congress, and spreads it's tax-fuelled spending so widely, that no president or presidential candidate dare suggest that military spending ought to do anything other than go up.

It seems to be the only aspect of govt expenditure which is completely immune from the rest of the economy.