4 ms·
Less than a year's GDP for that many years of war including Veteran's benefits seems pretty cheap as wars go. That is not an analysis of whether it could've be
by sailfast 3y ago
Less than a year's GDP for that many years of war including Veteran's benefits seems pretty cheap as wars go.
That is not an analysis of whether it could've been spent better, just a statement about war costs generally. Clearly not a total war at all. Barely a partial one.
- Nitrolo 3y agoAs a comparison, an estimate for the cost of World War II is $5T, for US spending at least [0]. Obviously there's differences in methodology etc. but seems to be the same ballpark. Not sure I'd call WWII cheap. [0]: https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2020/february/war-highest-defense-spending-measured https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2020/february/war-...