Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (13107)	3/20/2012 5:30:03 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 85487

Tim, you need to get a grip on the numbers you are using! <<<<The $3.2tril+ figure is in total, and not even in total for what we have already spent (which is only a bit above $1tril)>>>>> Craziness conservative economics! You try to kiss off the cost of the wars as nothing and at the same time take the outrageous position that SS is broke! So lets take your figure for the cost of the wars - 1 TRILLION. SS is running a deficit of 56 billion a year - ACCORDING TO YOUR NUMBERS. So taking all your numbers and divide 56 billion into 1 TRILLION and you get 17.85 years. Get that? The wars using your numbers could pay for the SS deficit for 17.85 years. Now since in reality the cost of the war will be much MUCH more - at least 3.2 TRILLION, lets use that final figure. That gives a time frame of OVER 57 YEARS. Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd, that doesn't even take into account that the SS has a surplus as it has been taken out of every Americans check. That money is there. And only with the most crazy childish maneuvers can anyone pretend it is not. Tim - SS is NOT our problem.