4 ms·
>>We spent the last few decades dismantling whatever shambles of a social safety net we had The empirical evidence would suggest the opposite: https://static0
by CryptoPunk 9y ago
>>We spent the last few decades dismantling whatever shambles of a social safety net we had
The empirical evidence would suggest the opposite:
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fivethirtyeight-gov4/16fivethirtyeight-gov4-blog480.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fiv...
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fivethirtyeight-gov6/16fivethirtyeight-gov6-blog480.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/01/16/us/politics/16fiv...
- refurb 9y agoI was going to say. Safety net as a percentage of gov't spending has only increased. That would suggest we're not dismantling anything.
- balance_factor 9y agoThe percentage going to military spending out of total government spending is only as small as it is on the chart if it's decided to try to have a very narrow view of what constitutes military spending, but a broad view of what can fit in other categories. If you include not just DoD spending, but DoD retiree and healthcare, veteran's benefits, interest on the debt of previous military spending, the defense-oriented outlays of the DoE, NASA, Homeland Security, the State Department and the intelligence agencies, then the defense percentage will be larger, and other portions smaller, including what is put under entitlement programs from fromer military/intelligence etc. getting retirement and health benefits.
- CryptoPunk 9y agoAgreed. Though the point about interest from debt incurred from military spending could equally apply to all other spending categories so wouldn't change the proportions. In any case, the largest area of spending growth has been social and entitlement programs, even if one excludes veterans-related social spending and controls for the effect of demographic changes on entitlement outlays.