3 ms·
Something like 40% of the US GDP is accounted for by direct government spending [0]. Then some % of the GDP is on things that are really non-discretionary, like
by roenxi 2y ago
Something like 40% of the US GDP is accounted for by direct government spending [0]. Then some % of the GDP is on things that are really non-discretionary, like food and shelter and a further % is private spending by people who are actually government employees. Noting that, it is conceivable that the US is undergoing a much softer version of Soviet-style dissolution. Overstretched, unable to pay for military needs that have been mis-assessed by central planners, no safety valve provided by a healthy decentralised market.
America's gentle deindustrialisation has been noticed. Everyone seems to know about it. The problem is that nobody seems willing to put the legwork in to maintain the US as a global hegemon and - simultaneously and in contradiction - nobody has briefed the military planners that they have to pull back a bit.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni...
- actionfromafar 2y agoI rarely agree with you, but I do on this one. I don't think it's only the military planners either, who could have benefited from a heads up.
- soco 2y agoIf the persons in charge prefer to increase their own and their friends' wealth, instead of looking what would be better for the country? Or maybe there's simply a different understanding of "country": for some the homeless aren't real citizens (or real humans), for other the workers are second class at best... so why would the leadership do things for those?