3 ms·

While the US does spend a lot, it does not spend more than "all other countries in the entire world, combined." Total reported military spending is $1.8 trillio

by Apes 7y ago

While the US does spend a lot, it does not spend more than "all other countries in the entire world, combined." Total reported military spending is $1.8 trillion, with the understanding that there are some countries (China) that are very likely massively under reporting their military expenditures. Looking at the raw numbers is ingenuous as well. As a percentage of GDP or government spending, the US doesn't even break the top 15 in the world on military spending. Also, the US spends more on healthcare and social security than any other country. Why are you giving those careful white glove treatment?

craftyguy 7y ago
> Also, the US spends more on healthcare and social security than any other country. Why are you giving those careful white glove treatment? The US is one of the most populous countries with any sort of widespread social welfare program. Those programs scale in cost with population size. There's no reason for military spending to also scale in the same way with population size. You aren't comparing the same things, so stop pretending you are.
- Apes 7y ago
  You've somewhat missed the point I was trying to make. Let me try to walk you through it in in a different way: * The original argument is that the US military spending is abnormally high, when considered as a raw dollar amount. However: * The US military spending is not actually abnormally high when considered as a percentage of GDP or Government budget. * There's hypocrisy in only considering the military in raw dollar amounts, but considering health care and social security as a percentage or per capita expense. * If you also consider social security and healthcare by their raw dollar amounts, you also end up with absurd levels of spending. * You should be pinning spending for health care, social security, and military to the same per capita or GDP metrics, and only then be objecting to them if they're abnormally high. * It's unethical to pick and choose what spending you personally object to, and then cherry-pick the method you judge that specific spending by to support your personal decision.

by Apes 7y ago

craftyguy 7y ago

> Also, the US spends more on healthcare and social security than any other country. Why are you giving those careful white glove treatment? The US is one of the most populous countries with any sort of widespread social welfare program. Those programs scale in cost with population size. There's no reason for military spending to also scale in the same way with population size. You aren't comparing the same things, so stop pretending you are.

Apes 7y ago
You've somewhat missed the point I was trying to make. Let me try to walk you through it in in a different way: * The original argument is that the US military spending is abnormally high, when considered as a raw dollar amount. However: * The US military spending is not actually abnormally high when considered as a percentage of GDP or Government budget. * There's hypocrisy in only considering the military in raw dollar amounts, but considering health care and social security as a percentage or per capita expense. * If you also consider social security and healthcare by their raw dollar amounts, you also end up with absurd levels of spending. * You should be pinning spending for health care, social security, and military to the same per capita or GDP metrics, and only then be objecting to them if they're abnormally high. * It's unethical to pick and choose what spending you personally object to, and then cherry-pick the method you judge that specific spending by to support your personal decision.