At this time US is spending
on military more than the whole planet combined.
You do realize that it is impossible, right?
Is it shocking? Unfortunately it is true. In fiscal 2004 US spent $399
billion (milliard) dollars on defense. Article below is already
obsolete as I believe US passed the world. This info is readly
available and easy to find. By comparison French spent $30 billion
(milliard). In 2010 projections are for $500 billion (milliard)
on defense. Amazing.
Note: US billion is counted as a milliard outside of US.
I cut and pasted some info from :
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending .asp#InContextUSMilitarySpendingVersusRestoftheWorld
Consider the following:
The US military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's.
The US military budget is more than 8 times larger than the Chinese budget, the second largest spender.
The US military budget is more than 29 times as large as the combined spending of the
seven rogue states (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) who spent $14.4
billion.
It is more than the combined spending of the next twenty three nations.
The United States and its close allies account for some two thirds to three-quarters of all military
spending, depending on who you count as close allies (typically NATO countries, Australia, Canada,
Israel, Japan and South Korea)
The seven potential enemies, Russia, and China together spend $116.2 billion, 27.6% of the U.S.
military budget.
It is impossible becasue your budget cannot be bigger than the
entire world's because you were part of the world the last time I
checked.
You don't understand this is just US defense budget and I am saying
that it is bigger than defense budgets of all other countries
combined, which is true.
US GNP is, I don't have an exact figure, about $5 trillion (billion).
You say that like we should reduce it, but we have interests in every region and need a massive and mighty army.
Maybe US doesn't need to have interest in every single place on this
planet. We could rely on allies. What we have, is a classic preliminary
to the arms race.
US evolved into a very insular place, scared of unknown and not
understanding the world. We think arming up to the teeth is an answer
to the ignorance.
In my opinion,I think EU is capable of reaching US economy,as it already has and might pass it.Military wise,I say yes,that EU can compare to US military standards.Why?Because its not the money or idiotic waste of spending taxes on military weapons that kill people,but the army's skill at using these new technologies.EU,in my opinion,is already as great as the US economy,and both will continue to get better.Plus,the US owes billions of dollars,and yet,many countries owe the US,its almost at debt.
You say that like we should reduce it, but we have interests in every region and need a massive and mighty army.
Maybe US doesn't need to have interest in every single place on this planet. We could rely on allies. What we have, is a classic preliminary to the arms race. US evolved into a very insular place, scared of unknown and not understanding the world. We think arming up to the teeth is an answer to the ignorance.
We have less interests than in the Cold War, that's why we don't give a damn about Africa anymore. And it's always a bad idea to rely on the troops of other countries, then you are not truly in control of your own nation. Machiavelli devoted a whole chapter of the Prince to that subject.
I'm not sure what you're saying in the last part, but isolationism is not a wise choice for America, we have too many vital interests to make that smart, and we must get more involved in some places to keep the Chinese in check.
America is also hardly armed to the teeth, that's why there aren't enough troops in Iraq, and our army is smaller than it was during the Cold War. I also think it's much better to be well-armed than vulnerable. No country in history was ever defeated because they were too well-armed.
The US hasn't evolved into a insular place,scared of unknown and not understanding the world.Every country is like that.Thats being very stereotype,that all of the US has evolved like that.Every country has its ups and downs on their economy and military,there is no way to stop it,we're humans,we're not perfect.I think that the US is spending way too much on the Iraqi War.
Spending money on worthless peices of crap like weapons is no way to support the economy,but guess what?The world isn't safe.
There are two carefully hidden from the american public reasons, that USA has to spend so much money to maintain a war machine that is 10X times bigger (and 50X more expensive) than it would need for self defence and control over their "vital interests".
Those reasons are:
1. A rather large part of the American economy is run by industries of the arms industry. US Government has always been extremely generous with those, and favors go round: half US gov. retirees get a job in the arms industry. One shouldn't forge about the all powerfull armed forces and secret services, kratos en kratei as Greeks say.
2. USA has brought herself into a position (by creating a deficit that's also larger than that of the rest of the world combined together, just as military spending) that her currency (and consequently her economy) has no real value. So, as any economics student that is not blinded by Friedmanism (SIC!) can tell you, if US armed forces seize being the scarecrow for the whole world, USA will lose face rabidly and in consequence, the dollar shall seize being the mighty currency it is. That would result into a Depression that would make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park - and there is no FDR nor any Maynard Keynes around to save the day this time.
In brief: US dollar and US economy are kept alive thanks to the military might of USA.
Please show me some evidence for that claim, I really doubt that the the US military goes into business meetings and makes a businessman give an American x amount of foreign currency for the dollar. That's total rubbish, and is just a way for you to bash America's business friendly and successful capitalistic.
Furthermore, no currency has any real value because almost no one backs up their currency with precious metals anymore. So what you just said for the dollar goes for every other currency. Learn a little about economics before you try to slander my country's economy, it'll make you look smarter.
America needs to walk a fine line, isolationism is not good and is the last thin I would ever advocate, but what we are doing now is uneccesary, we dont need troops anywhere in Europe, South America, or Africa. We do not need to use the army for humanitarian purposes (armies kill people not help them) and we dont need too invade countries with secular dictators who in a roundabout way uphold our inteerests against our enemies! We suppoerted Pinochet discreetly against communism, why not have supported Saddam discreeetly against fundamentalists and Iran? He hated them more than he hated us anyhow...
I hate how (even though I predicted mass chaos and there are no WMDs) people like me are criticized for being against the Iraq war, Im not against it because Im against war or some such nonsense, war is mans most common past and future activity, Im against it because Im against idealistic crap that harms greater strategic goals, like Somalia, like even sending an aircraft carrier to help with the tsunami, thats NOT the job of the military. Thus is you scaled it back it could be made cheaper, more efficient.
Even to this day we still buy tanks we dont need, have to many of them, and then dump them into the ocean to help build coral reefs, why the hell is that?
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Genghis, I really can't bother myself with your mere opinion... I have studied economics, and at a rather fine institution, so I would remarkably appreciate your little personified rants not to include suggestions about my background. Comprende? Good, now this little gem of yours
Please show me some evidence for that claim, I really doubt that the the US military goes into business meetings and makes a businessman give an American x amount of foreign currency for the dollar. That's total rubbish, and is just a way for you to bash America's business friendly and successful capitalistic.
is utterly precious, as it demonstrates in the most profound way your inability to comprehend with even the simpliest economics and politics. Not to mention that I am beginning to wonder whats's going on... either my written English sucks (highly unlikely) or you can't read.
Here it is again, in the most simplistic way I could possibly put it:
International business and especially the flow of the rather large investments is not, as you might think, a series of free transactions among free individuals. It's a rather complicated power play, involving a large amount of variables you (and even me) can't possibly account for all.
IF country A has a huge military, while country "B" does not, country "A" has a clear advantage when it comes on doing business with country "B". So, businesspeople from country "A" are lobbying their government (who is, usually, a mere servant of those, anyway) to give them the edge in transactions abroad. If you know anything about arms deals, for instance, you'd understand that US companies have always the edge, since USA is leading NATO, USA is offering a "protective umbrella" to several of it's allies and USA has the largest military sector (by far) on the globe.
Do you understand that, or should I spell it out even more simplistically?
Furthermore, no currency has any real value because almost no one backs up their currency with precious metals anymore. So what you just said for the dollar goes for every other currency. Learn a little about economics before you try to slander my country's economy, it'll make you look smarter.
If you were my student, you'll never get a degree, matey. Currency certainly has REAL value: it's the value (strength, you might call it) of the economy that backs it up. And a rather huge part of that value is dependant upon the deficit. In US case, if the dollar would be to be held at the actual value of the American economy... you would be maybe able to buy a bubble gum with a 100 dollar bill... maybe even get some change.
Your (it ain't yours, but I can't see you understanding that in the foreseeable future) country's economy is not something I'd have any reason to slander, not even your country. I am simply stating the obvious and that's not "slander".
If you actually read the report, you would see that
they present plenty of statistical evidence that shows the fallacy of
arguments made by liberal "economists". They statistically
show beyond a reasonable doubt that the US is not the have and have-not
society you accuse us of being.
That is probably one of the main points, quality of life does not
depend on having the latest computer or a 1 meter wide TV, it relies on
having time to enjoy yourself and spending time with other people or
doing things you like.
I have not been to the US or to the EU, but many people I know have,
and according to what they say poverty in large cities seems to be a
larger issue on the US.
Genghis, I really can't bother myself with your mere opinion
Then why did you reply?
Originally posted by Aristoteles
I have studied economics, and at a rather fine institution
Yes, I can see, was it the University of Moscow or Leningrad?
Originally posted by Aristoteles
Please show me some evidence for that claim, I really doubt that the the US military goes into business meetings and makes a businessman give an American x amount of foreign currency for the dollar. That's total rubbish, and is just a way for you to bash America's business friendly and successful capitalistic.
is utterly precious, as it demonstrates in the most profound way your inability to comprehend with even the simpliest economics and politics. Not to mention that I am beginning to wonder whats's going on... either my written English sucks (highly unlikely) or you can't read.
Here it is again, in the most simplistic way I could possibly put it:
International business and especially the flow of the rather large investments is not, as you might think, a series of free transactions among free individuals. It's a rather complicated power play, involving a large amount of variables you (and even me) can't possibly account for all.
IF country A has a huge military, while country "B" does not, country "A" has a clear advantage when it comes on doing business with country "B". So, businesspeople from country "A" are lobbying their government (who is, usually, a mere servant of those, anyway) to give them the edge in transactions abroad. If you know anything about arms deals, for instance, you'd understand that US companies have always the edge, since USA is leading NATO, USA is offering a "protective umbrella" to several of it's allies and USA has the largest military sector (by far) on the globe.
Do you understand that, or should I spell it out even more simplistically?
Thank you for giving me a sweeping generalization. If all that is true, then please tell me why the United States hasn't forced China to revalue it's currency, or why America has a trade deficit, or why America doesn't stop the OPEC cartel. Please give me one specific example.
Originally posted by Aristoteles
Furthermore, no currency has any real value because almost no one backs up their currency with precious metals anymore. So what you just said for the dollar goes for every other currency. Learn a little about economics before you try to slander my country's economy, it'll make you look smarter.
If you were my student, you'll never get a degree, matey. Currency certainly has REAL value: it's the value (strength, you might call it) of the economy that backs it up. And a rather huge part of that value is dependant upon the deficit. In US case, if the dollar would be to be held at the actual value of the American economy... you would be maybe able to buy a bubble gum with a 100 dollar bill... maybe even get some change.
Wow, again, another sweeping generalization without any empirical evidence. I'm not going to take such garbage at face value. Show me one respectable economist who says this. And by the way, the United States economy is valued at roughly a trillion dollars according to www.nationmaster.com, so I fail to see how it has no strength.
Because I am in that benevolent, caring mood of mine and because I think everybody - no matter how narrow minded or silly - has a right to be exposed to the truth... if one rejects it, you can only blame that one
Yes, I can see, was it the University of Moscow or Leningrad?
London School of Economics. Yes, nowhere near what it was 50 years ago, but quite alright still. Where do you study? Redneck high for the economically challenged?
Thank you for giving me a sweeping generalization.
I really think you should visit an online dictionary, you got your English all messed up
please tell me why the United States hasn't forced China to revalue it's currency
Errr... what?
or why America has a trade deficit
Because you are consuming - thanks to the strong dollar - waaaaay more than what you produce. That's why On a further notice, USA has not only a huge trade deficit.
or why America doesn't stop the OPEC cartel
Because the OPEC are close business partners of the Corps that helped build America - Oil companies. If you need more data on that, please don't ask. It's all on the internet, google and you'll find it.
Please give me one specific example
Check out from whom NATO countries buy their arms and with what kind of contracts. Specific enough?
Wow, again, another sweeping generalization without any empirical evidence. I'm not going to take such garbage at face value.
Thank you for your kind words.
Show me one respectable economist who says this [quote]
Show me one respectable economist who is not Frances Fukuyama (who ain't an economist anyway) or a Milton Friedman offspring, that says it is not so
[quote]And by the way, the United States economy is valued at roughly a trillion dollars according to www.nationmaster.com, so I fail to see how it has no strength.
If the dollar was measured at it's true value, your economy would be worth then... what, 15-20 billion Euros? Not very impressive...
Okay, because my name is attached to this forum I feel it is my duty to step in and say something. Firstly, I will not permit false imformation. And secondly, I want people to begin tolerating each other's posts. We are not on the verge of a new Cold War, so let's not act like we are.
Please post a link to the site or the name of the source that you are using so there are no accusations.
Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes.
I am terribly sorry but this is not stuff that can be found with a simple googling - I've read quite a number of books to be able to come to these conclusions without resorting to pre-chewed food and one-size-fits-all solutions.
I am sure if you google around in depth, you'll come up with something but it will be raw data or some of the sources you seem to despise. So, forget about the latter and let's try the former.
To start, try the official US gov. sites, they'll provide you with the numbers on the deficit of the american economy. Write that down. Be careful: go for "US budget deficit" not "US trade deficit".
Then you might try to find a little detail about oil transactions. That will be a bit harder, but you'll come up with a universal truth: that the currency used in oil transactions is the US dollar. And if you dig a bit more, you'll understand that this trend was established post WW2 - until then it was either gold or pounds.
Then try to find some data on weapon deals. If you are lucky enough, you'll find out that all weapon deals are being made in US dollars as well. If you are even more lucky, you'll establish that a host of NATO countries are forced to buy weapons from US companies and pay for them in US dollars.
Then you can check the spendings of the US gov. for military and how much it costs to the US taxpayer to maintain a military 10X larger of what you would need for your defense.
Then you can check how much the preparation and execution of that little show-off in Iraq has costed the American taxpayer and how much it is costing everyday to maintain a large military presence and fight off the guerillas (economically-wise, I am not even getting on the humane side of the equation).
If you have some time left, you can check out the new deals for Iraqi oil. Post-war, that is. Which companies got them, how much they profit off it, that kind of things. You might wish to investigate which US officials hold stock in these companies or how many of them have been on their payroll - that would be a side investigation, not crucial for our main point. Another side investigation: had Sadham signed deals for selling oil and accepting Euros (and not dollars) as payment? A third side investigation: Had Iran (the next target of Bush&Co.) done the same thing recently?
(optionally, you could then start reading economist books. I can give you a decent bibliography, starting from the very basics and proceeding to very advanced stuff - in all sides of the spectrum: Classicist, Marxist, Neo-Classicists, pure Monetarists, Keynesian, Neo-Keynesian, everything. unfortunately, this would take too much time so feel free to skip it).
When you have finished and digested all that data, please share with me your conclusions.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum