| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Global Military Spending; How much does YOUR country spend? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 8 2005, 12:10 PM (642 Views) | |
| Mainiac | Aug 8 2005, 12:10 PM Post #1 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
I think some folks have no real concept on how much money actually goes to defense spending, especially here in the US, where we spend nearly as much as the rest of the world combined... Here is a list which should cover most of the members of Sistertrek. Globalsecurity.org
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dr. Noah | Aug 8 2005, 12:13 PM Post #2 |
|
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
|
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to much (IMHO). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | Aug 8 2005, 12:47 PM Post #3 |
|
Admiral
|
I voted for 'Not enough.' |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| fireh8er | Aug 8 2005, 01:39 PM Post #4 |
|
I'm Captain Kirk!
|
^^^ Agreed. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| 24thcenstfan | Aug 8 2005, 02:24 PM Post #5 |
|
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
|
$466 Billion.
I don’t think that includes supplemental spending either.Reading down under the Note section, it doesn’t look like it. Supplemental would actually push that figure past $600 Billion. I haven't decided if I think we spend too much on National Defence. There is a lot to take into consideration. Such as: Afordability and current and future necessity.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Aug 8 2005, 03:07 PM Post #6 |
|
Admiral
|
I say too little. While we spend less that our other European partners we seem to get basically as much firepower. Perhaps this is due to advantages of a closer alliance with the US military. I think however we should spend more so that we are paying our fair share. I would suggest that we should aim to match the US in terms of % of GDP spent. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Mainiac | Aug 8 2005, 04:32 PM Post #7 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Verrry interesting. I just got around to voting myself (too much). I'm not sure whether the figures for the US include the supplementals or not myself - the notes aren't clear to me. Also, much of the US nuclear weapon budget is hidden in other departments and I think Veteran's Administration funding should be included but isn't, so the "real" number is yet higher. I think my biggest problem is the waste, corruption, and profiteering. Personnel costs are generally only about a quarter of the budget. Also, the choices of what we spend it on. Why are we still building more nuclear subs at a billion and a half each? You could hire and train 100's of Farsi translators for the cost of a single M-1 Abrams tank. Which do we need more?
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | Aug 8 2005, 06:06 PM Post #8 |
|
psyfi
|
As with almost every area of government, I also don't like the waste. But not having a super strong military and having a bunch of entitlements in their place amounts to buying a gorgeous home, furnishing it beautifully, landscaping it to the point of perfection, and never locking your door when you go out or go to bed at night. I think that we should be spending even more on the military and while keeping it volunteer, giving entitlements and privileges beyond the basics to those that serve. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Mainiac | Aug 8 2005, 09:03 PM Post #9 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Here's another analogy. Would you want to live in a luxurious gated community...in downtown Camden, NJ?...East St. Louis?...Watts? If, by advocating increased spending for the military, you mean the troops, Psyfi, then I am 100% with you. I saw a story recently about service members forced to commute 300 miles daily, due to lack of affordable housing at their place of assignment (SoCal). We can do better than that! You are correct that "entitlement" programs outweigh defence spending as a proportion of the Federal budget, as they have since at least the '30's, with the exception of WWII. I swill at that side of the government trough, indirectly, and many of us here at Sistertrek have lined up at one side or the other, (or both :D) at some point in their lives. Anyways, it's another topic for another day. If you think we should be throwing more money at defence contractors, however, then you are really just advocating corporate welfare over individual welfare. Sure, the US is dominant militarily in the world tody, it's forces unbeatable in open combat, but when you look at the return on our investment and compare it to what the rest of the world spends, and then figure the cost per citizen, or per square mile..., well, I'm not that impressed. And when you consider that we currently have had peaceful borders for (Pancho Villa excepted) over 150 years, compared to the rest of the world, well...(Hell, we can't even secure our own borders, while we demand other nations close theirs! :offtopic:
)One thing we need to do is cut the umbilical cord to the corporations. You really want to be fiscally conservative? Stop funding the R & D. Instead of supporting a bloated DoD beaurocracy, which generates detailed weapons specifications and capabilities guaranteed to limit competition to one or two competitors, let the Navy simply say, "We need to field 30 new vessels, 100 crew each, capable of littoral operations, by 2030." Let's let venture capitalism actually work, and investors actually take risks! What a concept! Better yet, it might actually let entrepreneurs back into the game. Nobody paid Hiram Maxim to develop the machine gun. Heck, we didn't even want it. He sold it to the French. The French!!! Also, we might give industry a reason to hire our service members for their experience and ideas, instead of their connections. No more funding from blank sheet of paper. The market will provide. (I hope I haven't come across too "ranty"! Just throwin' around some dumb ideas. :lol: ) |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Aug 8 2005, 10:13 PM Post #10 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
Too much. Guess who is the beneficiary of a lot of that spending is - you got it - the USA. The same applies (I dare say) to most other nations on the planet , a very good reason for the USA to keep everyone edgey and insecure , it's good for the USA's arms industies and hence good for the USA's economy (even if it means that money that could be used to improve public health, education and infrastructure is diverted to unnecessary arms purchases). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Timbo | Aug 9 2005, 12:01 AM Post #11 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
We spend 9.3 Billion a year!? On what! I have 2 mates who just graduated from RMC in Canberra (that's officer school over here) and they're always bitching about how they're equipment is obsolete or they have US or UK surplus which they stopped using decades ago. Way too much! |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 9 2005, 06:47 AM Post #12 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Fine, design your own planes, guns, and other weapons... |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 9 2005, 06:48 AM Post #13 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
I'm curious as to how much of a percentage of GDP each government spends. Our number, large as it seems on paper, is a tiny percentage of our Gross Domestic Product. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 9 2005, 08:27 AM Post #14 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I voted "enough" - any more money they need they can get from better managing their money. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 9 2005, 08:30 AM Post #15 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Somerled - is every problem in the world Americas fault? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." Learn More · Register Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |


I don’t think that includes supplemental spending either.
There is a lot to take into consideration. Such as: Afordability and current and future necessity.
)
2:07 PM Jul 11