4 ms·
Please look up numbers before you claim such ludicrous things next time. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS http://data.worldbank.org/indica
by _Tev 9y ago
Please look up numbers before you claim such ludicrous things next time.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS
So you spend 3,3% of your GDP opposed to what, EU's 1,5% of GDP? And how much of it is for failed wars such as Iraqi one?
You might not look so misinformed next time if you find some sources for your claims...
- throwanem 9y agoI see 14.5% vs. 4.1%, US and EU respectively, in the 2015 figures listed there. US and EU GDP being roughly equal, this works out to an absolute factor of ~3.5x as well as a relative one, which strikes me as fairly significant. To be sure, US military spending isn't purely motivated by our concern for our NATO commitments. But, considering that the US contribution constitutes by far the lion's share of resources available to the alliance in both absolute value and percentage of GDP, it seems to me that much more effort is required, than you exert here, to argue that the termination of such commitments, or even simply the reallocation of significant funds away from US military expenditure, would in no material way affect spending priorities among the EU nations.
- danmaz74 9y agoPlease notice that the 14.5% refers to the "central government" (ie, federal) budget. It doesn't account for the fact that much of your public expenditures are done at the state level - here in the EU, "centra government" means Germany, UK, etc.) nor the fact that, with lower taxes, your budget as a % of GDP is of course lower.
- _Tev 9y agoLook at the share of the GDP being spent. You probably have smaller (% of GDP) budget than we do.
- throwanem 9y agoThat is GDP percentage. I'm not sure where else I should be looking.