A Washington Post article "The Cost of War, Unnoticed " shows that the Bush administration is passing the already discredited story that tax cuts brought in more tax revenues to account for the fact that most Americans are not suffering heavily from the effects of the war on Iraq, but other groups say the real reason seems to be that the war is being fought on credit to come due just as boomers retire.
That will cause a national crisis that will allow them to grab Boomers Social Security payments (from what Paul O'Neill said was the most important deal ever between government and it's people) and essentially discontinue Social Security for Boomers, Xers, and beyond.
Many sources have shown that is exactly what hard core neocons want to do.
It's easy to imagine even a game plan that keeps the SS tax and adds it to the flat tax created by AMT -- which most people in the nation will be paying by 2030 -- and you have a 41% flat tax on wages, (less on capital income that the wealthy primarily receive).
It's a multimillionare's dream come true!
There'll be plenty of money for more wars to grab resources and more overpriced underperforming military contracts, and rebuilding.
Excerpt:
Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor who was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton and who was among the winners of the 2001 Nobel prize for economics, said Bush has undertaken a "deceptive policy of saying you can have both guns and butter" -- a strategy similar to Johnson's in the early years of Vietnam. In December, Stiglitz co-authored a study that predicts the Iraq conflict alone will eventually cost taxpayers more than $1 trillion, counting military rebuilding and health care for wounded veterans.
"It's actually turning out to be a very expensive war," Stiglitz said. But "it has been designed to be a war the American people don't feel."
Well, until it's too late.