3 ms·
2.1m service members, over 700k civilians employed by the military directly [0]. Then you have the endless stream of military contractors, and you're looking at
by cheschire 5y ago
2.1m service members, over 700k civilians employed by the military directly [0]. Then you have the endless stream of military contractors, and you're looking at almost 1 out of every 50 working age people in America benefits directly from the federal military activity.
So yeah, of course people are taking pride in a big military since it provides so much of their community income.
0: https://www.governing.com/archive/military-civilian-active-duty-employee-workforce-numbers-by-state.html https://www.governing.com/archive/military-civilian-active-d...
- Tostino 5y agoThat budget could still go to supporting their communities if we employed them doing more meaningful work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, etc.
- jimmygrapes 5y agoFor some perspective, often this money and manpower DOES go into improving local infrastructure. New Orleans levies were substantially more resilient in the last few weeks as a result of the Army Corps of Engineers.
- foerbert 5y agoOften? The Army Corps of Engineers had a budget of less than $8B in 2021. The Army Corps of Engineers has three main missions, one of which is the civil side of things. I'm not sure how it breaks down budget-wise though. But saying money spent on the military often flows into local infrastructure seems laughable.
- southerntofu 5y agoJust because the military establishment is capable to pool together some skills/resources to polish its public image doesn't mean another non-militaristic public service (in whatever definition of the term) couldn't achieve same or better results.