People will point out that US health does get a decent chunk of money, though they’ll leave out that it goes to others (insurance profit) so the care part doesn’t actually get that value. Like how US spends more just in tax per-capita than many countries with universal care spend total, but we get significantly less for it.
So really it should mirror the war table but with a fat CEO or two smoking a cigar, with the emaciated doctor excluded from the table.
Hey, now. Sciences gets a little bit on their dish when it makes something for war.
It’s a sausage, shaped like an A-bomb
Science is in the kitchen, redoing the duck confit for the third fucking time.
Anti-Chef, is that you?
Context: this is translated image from soviet magazine issued in 1953, right after Stalin’s death.
Also Sciences table is Libraries table.
Valid criticism, even though Soviet Union fell victim to the very same thing later on
This just proves we are not getting smarter as time goes on.
deleted by creator
Can you fucking imagine the US spending 25% of its gdp on the military? Jesus fuck we could build a death star
I am sure that is currently in planning
Somehow, MacArthur returned…
There was once a Congressional Petition that got enough signatures to be read aloud in the US House of Representatives but it got rejected on the floor.
Probably Jeff Bezos’s next project.
deleted by creator
Well, Germany was in an all-out war that was fought partially on their soil. It was very obvious to the Nazi leadership that there was a very real risk of losing that war.
That’s not comparable at all to the wars the USA or Russia have fought in this century. Even in WW2 there was never any serious risk of anyone invading the USA.
The last time the USA has had a war on their territory that actually threatened the existance of the USA was, I guess, the civil war.
If it was about the existance of the USA, they’d also be spending a little more on the war effort.
(Just to make sure that nobody misunderstands me: Nazis are scum and as an Austrian I am really happy they lost the war. I was just talking about defence spending strategy.)
deleted by creator
Because there hasn’t been any credible threat for decades.
But now that Russia is back as an evil “superpower”, defence spending is sharply rising in Europe.
And so far there is no real indication that Russia will ever take the Ukraine let alone attack the EU/NATO. If Russia or China were to directly attack NATO, you’d see defense spending going up pretty sharply.
But even now, nobody believes that Russia or China will dare to attack NATO in the near future. It probably will be limited to a proxy war (proxy for the NATO side) in the Ukraine and/or Taiwan.
defence spending is sharply rising in Europe.
From “nothing” to “almost nothing”
deleted by creator
If you don’t plot defence spending against GDP but use absolute values it’s higher now than ever: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/military-spending-defense-budget
Most of the fluctuations you can see in the GDP based graph are caused by GDP fluctuations, not by defence spending fluctuations.
And since the US GDP rose much more than inflation, the military also got more actual value from that defence budget. From 1960 to 2021, the cumulative inflation in the USA is 815% (+100%, since the inflation only measures increase not the value that was originally there). In the same time the GDP rose to 4564%, so 5 times faster. So if you have the same % of GDP defence spending in 1960 as you have now, the military has 5x the budget, adjusted to inflation.
China is in a similar boat, but much more extreme. China’s defence spending vs GDP stayed pretty much on the same level since 1990. But in the same time their GDP rose from $361 billions to $17.7 trillions. Their GDP multiplied by a factor of 49 and so did their defence spending. Inflation over the same time was just 107% (again +100% to make our calculation correct). So adjusted for inflation, their military spending went up by a factor of 23.6.
TLDR: Your measurement measures the wrong thing, so you get the illusion that spending goes down while it actually increases quite a lot.
Still, the assertion that war expenditure trumps everything else in today’s West is provably false.
I never argued that. Though it’s not hard to argue that government funds are precious and could be used elsewhere to better effect.
deleted by creator
That’s a good distinction. Even most anti-war people would probably do everything in their power to repel an existential threat on their soil, to say nothing of the cost.
Wonder what Ukraine’s GDP spending percent is?
For 2024 their draft budget allocates “over half” of the whole budget towardds defence spending (Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-plans-big-rise-defence-spending-2024-draft-budget-2023-09-15/), which corresponds to roughly 30% GDP.
I am not sure whether military aid that they get for free is counted in that budget. If not, the total amount of money spent for Ukraine’s defence will be a lot higher than the >50% from the budget or ~30% of the GDP.
Also, take note that the GDP is usually (as also in the specific case of the Ukraine) reduced by a lot in case of a war on home soil. Major parts of the Ukrainian industry have been destroyed or occupied and plundered by Russia.
So even if they wouldn’t change their defence budget, lowering the GDP would increase defence spending as percentage of GDP.
But obviously they did increase the defence spending, so both effects come together to push the percentage of GDP quite high.
Self-inflicted existential threat, but existential threat none the less.
When the war went south for the Nazis, their leadership (driven by Hitler) became convinced that they were loosing because “the German people have become degenerated and weak” (not a direct quote, can’t be bothered to dig through Nazi quotes). So they wanted to punish the people for that by going all-out in their war efforts. They sent children and ols people to die even though (or maybe even because) they knew they would lose regardless. They did use scorched earth tactics on their own land, leaving nothing behind, purpously so that their people would suffer.
Even in the days before capitulation, when everyone knew that the Nazis where done, they sent even more people in to fight and die in that lost war.
Tbh, I’m surprised they didn’t spend more than 25% GDP on the war. Probably because nobody would lend them money at that stage and they have used up all their reserves by then.
But lucky us Central Europeans that they mismanaged so much and where so bad at basic strategy.
And Healthcare in the USA is between 18-20%.
deleted by creator
Why didn’t we become smarter? isn’t it’s time already
To understand as a matter of fact that more important
To stop the clutter of hammer of war?
Elysium, Tanks
Well, our systems and societies grow ever more complex and stable, but yes there was a sudden drop in average IQ due to leaded anti-knocking agents being added to fuel, among other pollutants affecting development.
Clearly 830Bn budget for Military every single year is too goddamn much, but at the same time I’m all for supporting NATO and opposing Russia. I think slowly reducing the military budget of the USA would be good, but keeping active operations overseas alive. As much as I realize the USA has caused more harm than good, I also realize suddenly ending our operations can be just as harmful, such as when the Trump Admin released 5k Taliban Fighters and withdrew from Afghanistan, to which the Biden Administration followed through with.
This image is dumb as shit. The education system is setup so there’s a good pool of people going into sciences. Then from the science people make better weapons and the weapons get used for war. War is used to get the money again and cycle repeats. Arts are for sanity and creativity for new weapons and healthcare gets used in war too so it’s not wasted
This comment sounds like a line from Dr Strangelove
You might have a point if it weren’t for the fact that forgiving education loans would pay for itself but the government still won’t use any extra budget on it, and healthcare for veterans is so terrible that they clearly aren’t even trying to make meaningful reform on it. Very little healthcare costs are accrued by their young enlisted troops who undergo physicals before being allowed to train and deploy, compared to people past 30s.
The people who are working in STEM don’t need loan forgiveness like the a lot of other people who took loans to study in fields that don’t end up contributing to the military. As for healthcare I’m referring to things like trauma and human performance, if war breaks out this is critical infrastructure. I’d also argue that the cost of having a soldier tear a tendon and have to leave the military would be large and happen often so being able to rehabilitate and get them back to work is critical. Once a veteran is finished the government don’t care because they can’t contribute.
You have to remember the military industrial complex is a self sustaining machine now that it’s beyond reining in. It will keep policy in place to keep the cycle going. The economy now depends on it and needs wars or at least the ability to pressure countries into doing what they want so they can extract more money to feed it
reigning*
Metal Gear solid is what really opened my eyes to a global economy being supported by war. I know war and conflict is to an extent, part of being human. But it’s been monetized and it’s become too big to fail.
The military industrial complex has become too big to fail, because it is jobs provider for many places that don’t have much resources. It’s not a coincidence that many defense contractors are headquartered in peripheral regions like the American South West desert and Scotland. These places don’t have much to offer in terms of resources so they became dependent on the industry. Either that, or they become tax haven like other small entities like Ireland, Luxembourg and Seychelles.
I’m not trying to justify the existence of MICs by the way, I’m explaining why the industry became intertwined. Although, I believe there is just war if a country is either provoked or to stop atrocities, such as the NATO intervention in Yugslav wars and supporting Ukraine against the Russian invasion.
Yeah, the writing in that game was too on point.
They did a great job of blending the surreal nature of MGS with the real world and current events.
Which one, all of them? Where would you recommend I start
Metal Gear solid is a good start. But so is snake eater which is getting a remake release this coming year
Thanks a bunch
Holy crap I just got the weirdest boner
War. War never changes
And there are no “sides”, every one loses, even and especially the ones who think they win money, power or land will lose in the end. When will they finally get it that we all live on this insignificant pebble in dark cold space and we have to grow up instead of fighting like spoiled toddlers in a sandbox.
This cartoon is from 70 years ago. 80 years ago was 1943 which was in the middle of World War 2. At that point, war getting a sizable chunk of the GDP was perhaps more understandable. So the caption on the cartoon actually undersells it.
What are you talking about? 80 years ago was 1927, right? 🧑👨🧑🦳🪦
It still made a lot of sense, since you know it was made during the height of the cold ware before ICBMs/mutually assured destruction was a thing, so a ground conflict didn’t seem unreal
This is longer true. Social security, Medicare, and medicaid are all less than 80 years old and make up more of the federal budget than defense spending.
These are the top 5 budget item according to the us treasury for 2022. Social security 23% Heath 15% National defense 13% Medicare 13% Income security 13%
“Veterans benefits and services” is another category which I guess could be considered war spending or healthcare.
Social security is paying back what people have put into it, nobody alive today is collecting from it without having paid in to it their entire working life. It seems misleading to call this an expenditure in the sense that military spending is.
There is also a distinct difference between healthcare spending and healthcare being received. The US spends a lot on “healthcare” that is actually insane insurance profiteering or useless administrative costs. There’s a reason the US has the highest expenditure per person in the world, but the worst health outcomes among any industrialized nation (and worse than some developing nations if you’re a minority).
Preach! “Medicare-For-All”, Single-Payer, whatever you want to call it, we need universal healthcare! It’s literally better and cheaper.
It’s not true because it’s Russian propaganda
What’s the point of science or healthcare if your neighbors comes in and kill you all ?
False dichotomy
How ? That’s why the army or whatever it is that defend our values feels so important to most people.
deleted by creator
Well, that isn’t true, the US military by its existence defends the country due to its size. Nobody actually wants to pick a fight with their military power.
deleted by creator
You still need science to make the war machine go brrrrrrrrrr or someone else will out-war you. I don’t support wat but it does seem that some of humanity’s biggest tech breakthroughs have been dude effects of wanting to blow each other up better than the other guys
That’s because the people who are in charge haven’t changed much. Sure, their names have changed, but they’re largely the same type of person who do the same types of things.
Their first names have changed, the families are all the same.
History doesn’t repeat, it plagiarizes.
History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
Looks like it’s from 1953 Soviet Union?
Ah, after certain Georgian dictator died
Well kinda depends on the country. Switzerland spends 2 bilion for the military but 8 bilion for education and 35 bilion for health care. I am sure, the balance looks pretty similar or even more extrem in the northic european country
Omg this is so sad can we get 1000 likes :((((
