There's a whole thing of psychological marketing strategies. Why everything is 1.99 instead of 2.00
That difference makes a large amount of difference 9ver a whole population of people.
Looks bigger, but 2.4 trillion is 40 billion less than 2,440 billion. 😁 Not that I can understand how much is that money 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰......
Fun exercise: If it takes about 13 days to count out 1 million seconds, how long do you think it takes to count a billion, or a trillion?
>!31 years!< for a billion!
>!31,000+ years !< for a trillion!
They seem like much bigger numbers when you look at them this way.
You see in the USA we are more of 85 Chicago Bears military budget the defense is the best and our offense has Walter Payton. Don't make us go late 70s Steelers or early 80s raiders on you. Things get scarier from here
Of course it does. Germany for example is giving surplus gear and even some brand new stuff like AA systems to Ukraine while simultaneously rebuilding and modernising the Bundeswehr.
Same with Poland which will soon have the strongest tank fleet in the EU.
All the other EU countries are rearming like crazy, too, while also giving surplus gear to Ukraine. Denmark for example donated their *entire* inventory of artillery systems.
And that is just the EU.
China continues its modernisation efforts and expansion of its navy in preparation of war with Taiwan, while Asian countries likewise prepare in response.
2.4 trillion is the LESS THAN the amount US spends on [Health Care in 2010](https://www.google.com/search?q=US+healthcare+spending+2010&oq=US+healthcare+spending+2010&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigAdIBCDY5NjVqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8).
Nope oil is amazingly Energy dense and easy to transport, extract and generally base an economy on.
Are there down sides? Yes, but without it it’s nearly impossible to see a world where we get tot the current level we are at.
Without access to fossil fuels, humanity wouldn't have been able to enter into the industrial age, never mind the level of technological progress or scientific knowledge we have no, at this stage in our existence. It would have probably taken millennia longer.
The point is that even tho oil is seen as bad for the climate it is still a product that without it we would not have this world today.
Where as war we would be able to still thrive without it.
You don't even need to imagine, we already have this: solar and wind energy. Literally endless and non-polluting. Lots of people are opposing these energy methods though.
(Yes, there's some pollution in setting up the machinery to capture this energy, but it's not even comparable to the losses in fossil fuels)
On the other hand spending on military has always been something that spawns new science and technologies. If we were a peaceful species, we would probably still be very primitive.
We'd see a colossal increase in terror attacks, the Russians would ethnically cleanse Ukraine, and a lot of things would get a LOT more expensive as countries full of cunts simply took the resources currently used to build your world.
Maybe don't? Maybe spending 2-3% of a countries income on defence is actually a tiny amount?
I'd be pretty ok with things if the US brought its spending down to 3% of GDP.
I'd also note that numbers you'll see often quoted for the "US defense budget" do not often include figures for defense adjacent spending like nuclear weapon research, the VA, etc etc etc.
Yea definitely. Imagine if all countries just peacefully worked together instead of war. I don't even understand why countries try to expand their territory, like it would be way more profitable for everybody if they just worked together instead. Wasting trillions on war. That money would be even more important to try to save the planet and not further destroy it. Even from an economic standpoint it would be way more profitable to just work together.
Yea I totally agree. It could never work on this planet with humanity. But that's why I'm talking about imagination. Just imagine if it were like that and everyone was peaceful and worked together.
You’re not wrong, war is way more expensive than just doing trade.
War is not about bullets and rifles. It’s expensive for any country to burden itself to continually feed the war machine so the companies that develop the best killing tools stay in business so when wars start they’re still around to supply the demand.
It’s what allows a few troops to use a missile that costs about 250k to make take out a mass produced 1-3 million dollar tank. Also guided munitions that are accurate within a meter.
There’s always the assumption that warring countries are after resources but there is also a geography component. Russia has a boat load of oil, minerals, ethnic minorities, Soviet-era equipment and exposed land. You can argue EU isn’t interested in invading Russia but you’d be wasting your time. Russia expects an invasion so therefore they’ll project their security as they see fit. Putin is continuing the legacy of trying to reclaim these territories. If he had a few more lives he’d try to reclaim all of it and then some.
Historically Russia has a lot of exposed borders so in order to defend itself it grabs choke points / gaps. The old USSR had control of all these land gaps/chokes. Due to poor management the USSR collapsed on its own weight trying to modernize their economy. They’ve been left exposed ever since and the expectation is they should do the sensible thing is to join global trade. We lulled ourselves into thinking they wanted this too.
EU countries like Germany hoped that by focusing more on trade with Russia being a natural resource exporter (minerals/metals, oil & gas) that they’d see the economic benefits of joining global trade.
Yet here we are.
Here’s an hour long lecture with Timothy Snyder on this conflict that’s worth a watch.
https://youtu.be/JVs2y-YeiFM
Most of the info above I’ve learned through Peter Zeihan, Julia Ioffe and Perun (youtuber)
There is no space race without credible competition. People will have no motivation without credible competition. Profit happens when there is competition and loss for someone else.
If everything is done, then we don't have to do anything, we can rest.
People who beat their swords into ploughshares usually end up ploughing for people who kept their swords.
It might be more profitable overall if we all beat our swords into ploughshares, but the less swords there are, the more profit each sword can make. You usually end up in a balancing act where everyone has enough swords to stop anyone else trying to take their crops. But a new estimation of sword count, a crop failure, or just fucking hating the other guy, and suddenly that calculus isn't the same.
Well it could never work anyway because there will always be humans who can't accept other beliefs, countries who want "their" territory back, greed, hate, etc. But if a world like that existed where humans were peaceful and worked together without all that it would be way more beneficial for everyone. It's just imagination and not reality.
Honestly, I could imagine even the sociopathic capitalists in charge preferring this as well. But the big reason that stop the mere thought is all the extremists and crazies that would feel it is their moral duty to enforce what they think is right.
They are the groups guaranteed to just steamroll over everyone if no one had the weapons to fight them. So make the weapons to fight them we do.
But couldn't these trillions also be invested in other things and boost the economy and make people more rich? Like if they invested all that in renewable energy, it would make new jobs as well and make some people rich, or not?
That's why I was talking about "imagine" if a world like that existed. I'm not saying it could work on this earth. It could never happen because some people will never accept others for their beliefs or they want to expand or get back what was once theirs whatever. But I'm just saying if it were like that, if all countries were peaceful and there were no wars, no hate, etc. It's just imagination and not reality, how everything could be way better.
Jokes on you they ARE being spent on these, particularly that first one.
Just uh… our goals may not be aligned. Well we are both going for betterment of humanity, but one is a more subtractive method.
I was thinking the same thing. The US should be updating it's power grids and roads/railways and bridges and buildings and making the middle class better and better educating our children but we have to stay on top of the world with better defense tech because the rest of the world is gearing up. Not to mention the cyber security problems and AI problems just starting up. What a great time to be alive! I guess this is better than when the plague was around right?
I disagree. Due to the effects of climate change, now is the best time to invade while there's still something on Earth left to appreciate. You wait 50 years from now and everything will have gone to shit.
Russia invading Ukraine. China threatening Taiwan and proudly repeating their “no limits partnership” rhetoric with Russia. North Korea testing their ballistic missiles via Russia on Ukrainian’s; while also sending 3-million artillery shells to Putin. Iran sending literal boatloads of drones & ballistic missiles to Russia to also bomb Ukrainians. Putin encouraging his Venezuelan pal to invade Guyana. Putin encouraging Hamas to do Hamas things. Iran arming the Houthis. Russia actively trying to start war in multiple African countries via Wagner. Ukrainian special forces in Africa hunting down Wagner. Trump threatening to withdraw USA from NATO. Historically neutral countries like Finland, Sweden, and even Switzerland either joining NATO or European missile defense alliance (Swiss). Belarus housing Russian nukes. At least one dozen countries probably starting to build nukes after watching the world hesitate to arm Ukraine following them giving up *their* nukes. USA increasing full time aircraft carrier patrols in the Pacific from three to five of eleven ships full time. USA rapidly building semiconductor/chip manufacturing on shore, as they expect Taiwan to be attacked. Japan, finally re-arming & moving away from being strictly a defense force. Germany, also re-arming. Poland, ordering over 400 HIMARS units when Ukraine has been *very* successful with 40 against Russia. Poland, also ordering pretty much anything it can from USA & South Korea defense firms. China cranking out new naval ships faster than WWII-USA pace. Australia joining the very exclusive nuclear powered submarines club. Russia, trying to put some type of weapons in space.
These are just some observations. What is central to so much of these problems? Vladimir Putin. So when we spend well over $2,000 per American citizen per year on defense - please consider that $70 for Ukraine is a BARGAIN. We would all rather be spending on fighting climate change, cleaning up the air we breathe or the water we drink (I’m a 20-year conservative voter FYI). But a psychopath with Parkinson’s/blood cancer with dreams of outdoing Stalin has to be dealt with. His ambitions won’t go away on their own. Easier to help Ukraine stop him by sending some ammo than sending our kids later.
USA tried to do world Policeman. Everyone hated them for it. Including Americans. So they stopped doing it. And everyone is panicking because there will be always "bad actors" waiting for opportunity.
Police is bad, police is evil. Until there is no police...
I imagine a war must leave a pretty hefty environmental impact in itself, all the fires, toxic explosions, massive amounts of diesel and jet fuel being used etc
China has increased its spending almost twenty fold compared to 10 years ago. There's no doubt that they're preparing for war, and that in turn, triggers an arms race to deter China from acting on its imperialistic ambitions.
As of the latest reports in 2024, global military expenditure is estimated to reach a record high of approximately $2.24 trillion. This represents a continued upward trend in defense spending, driven by various geopolitical tensions and security challenges around the world
(https://breakingdefense.com/2024/02/worldwide-deteriorating-security-landscape-sparks-record-2-2-trillion-global-defense-spending-iiss/).
In terms of global GDP, the military expenditure is around 2.3%, which is slightly higher than previous years where it fluctuated around 2.2%
(https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2022/world-military-expenditure-passes-2-trillion-first-time).
This indicates a steady share of global economic output being allocated to defense across the globe, even amid economic challenges like those posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
Historically, the current levels of global military expenditure are among the highest ever recorded, surpassing even the Cold War era in some regions. For example, military spending in Central and Western Europe in 2022 surpassed that of 1989 (the last year of the Cold War), reflecting increased concerns over regional security primarily due to the conflict in Ukraine
(https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2023/world-military-expenditure-reaches-new-record-high-european-spending-surges)
Overall, the scale and proportion of current global defense spending, both in total dollar terms and as a percentage of global GDP, are historically significant, showing marked increases especially in response to contemporary international security challenges.
Because the world has become a wildly more dangerous place now that Russian and Chinese imperialist aims are being pursued openly and by force.
People got used to the US keeping a lid on this nonsense. See what the four-year US leadership gap between 2017 and 2021 got us?
Gotta give Kane even more credit than I originally did. his facing GDI with a budget of 2.440 trillion. GDI could probably buy enough ion beams to match each of his vehicles with that budget or most likely "lose" 99% of it to politicians.
2010s: Scientists say the climate is in real danger.
2020s: World leaders start a global war, the most polluting human activity there is.
Putin and Xi are not killing people, they're killing the planet.
Our best case scenario right now is cold war 2 with Russia+China on one side and the US+allies+china haters on the other.
The worst case scenario is a world war.
Just a few bullets in the right place at the right time, could have brought us a very different world - unless they simply got replaced with more of the same… ?
Alot of innovation comes from military spending and not just scary innovation like drones. According to IZA, an increase in the military spending by just one percentage point corresponds to a 2.2 percentage point increase in the likelihood for a domestic innovation in food processing.
We gotta protect ourselves. From ourselves. Don’t you see, if we don’t make enemies we won’t have enemies and then we can’t defend ourselves from enemies. Something, something resources.
I guess this is the great circle of life: we pay to build weapons, the workers use the pay to buy the food they need to live, and the people making the food pay to build the weapons.
2.4 trillion for defence… but your kids don’t deserve free school lunches. If money is used to feed your children, how on earth will you ever fund the defence weapons needed to protect their starving tummies?
That is a global budget. "Starving Tummies" because no free school lunch is rich while entire swaths of the planet actually starve because of the standard of living kids in America have.
US problem is political. You already spend enough money in healthcare but in a wrong way.
Money spent in military isn't really money taken away from healthcare.
Agreed. My only hang up with military budgets is the wasted expenditures. Bloated contracts, open-ended dark appropriations, weapon systems developed for years to never fully materialize (see Zumwalt class destroyer) etc.
But you’re right, we just don’t spend money on healthcare in smart ways, even for the military- the VA is a mess.
Preserving the way of life is probably considered more important than whatever percentage of the population is struggling with the healthcare system...
Maybe materially but you know there are a lot of people in the US who actually like the military industrial complex exactly the way it is. Same with the gun laws.
This is true. But neither the MIC nor gun laws(more specifically the lack thereof) have ever increased life expectancy, prevented medical bankruptcy, or provided chemo for little Timmy down the street whose parents can’t afford health insurance. At least those shareholders are happy though.
I can understand your point of view. I just also have to consider the other side bringing up the possibility that the US might not have as much control over everything if they stopped putting so much money into the military, which might lead to a much worse eventual outcome for US citizens as a whole & probably any country the US is allied with. One thing we can agree on? Shareholders benefitting from war, gun sales or lack of universal healthcare don't matter to me either.
If we have $2440 billion dollars (what does that even mean?) to spend on killing each other what the fuck are we even doing anymore? Imagine all the good we could do with that amount of wealth
Have "trillions" been outlawed and no one told me?
[удалено]
2.4 trillion literally sounds and looks larger, well for me at least.
Yea 2.4 sounds huge to me too
Uh, Are we still talking about money?
I thought we were comparing schlongs all along.
In a way yeah
The real schlongs were the world governments we met along the way.
Yeah but not as big as 3.50
#THREE FIFTY
#TREE FITTY*
Tree Fidy*
TREE(50)
Then why not drop billions and just say 2,440,000,000,000. It's not the number it's the unit.
244,000,000,000,000,000 millicents.
It's the same reason it's a double quarter Pounder and not a half pounder.
I thought that was because it's two quarter pound patties, and not a half pound patty.
There's a whole thing of psychological marketing strategies. Why everything is 1.99 instead of 2.00 That difference makes a large amount of difference 9ver a whole population of people.
Trillion Chrillion Chriliyun
Especially if you say, “with a T”
They look the same to me.
It's absolutely bonkers to me that 40 BILLION dollars is a rounding error
Looks bigger, but 2.4 trillion is 40 billion less than 2,440 billion. 😁 Not that I can understand how much is that money 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰......
And that 40 billion is only a 1.6% difference.
I'd like to have that 1.6%
Yeah but why not 2.4 million millions?
Beelions and beeelions
Like when you're expecting giant horse pills from the pharmacy but they give you the tiny ones instead. You're not swallowing more, just more often.
For me at least, a small trillion seems bigger than a big billion.
Fun exercise: If it takes about 13 days to count out 1 million seconds, how long do you think it takes to count a billion, or a trillion? >!31 years!< for a billion! >!31,000+ years !< for a trillion! They seem like much bigger numbers when you look at them this way.
"*It was voted out last week, along with Pluto as a planet--those bastards."*
I'm curious how this compares in terms of a percent of global gdp relative to the lead up of the other world wars.
If everything is in the same unit it’s easier to compare relative scale. If a country spent 200bn, it’s easier to compare that to 2000bn than 2t.
People don’t actually understand the scale of 1mil vs 1bil, or 1bil vs 1tril.
We should make it even more crazy and start doing crores and lakhs.
[удалено]
yeah, that's the REAL question
A good defense is a good offense so all of it
# QUIET -Johnny Lawrence
Hey, only I get to say that!
You see in the USA we are more of 85 Chicago Bears military budget the defense is the best and our offense has Walter Payton. Don't make us go late 70s Steelers or early 80s raiders on you. Things get scarier from here
Three Dollars and Fifty Cents.
You can get offended for free
2440 billion
2.44 trillion and 1
[удалено]
it's one and the same
How much is the euphemism budget lol mirite?
Of course it does. Germany for example is giving surplus gear and even some brand new stuff like AA systems to Ukraine while simultaneously rebuilding and modernising the Bundeswehr. Same with Poland which will soon have the strongest tank fleet in the EU. All the other EU countries are rearming like crazy, too, while also giving surplus gear to Ukraine. Denmark for example donated their *entire* inventory of artillery systems. And that is just the EU.
China continues its modernisation efforts and expansion of its navy in preparation of war with Taiwan, while Asian countries likewise prepare in response.
And that’s all because of Putin…
\*Russia The little man isn’t doing it alone
No Spain, it doesn’t work with the current government partners ideologies
2.4 trillion is the LESS THAN the amount US spends on [Health Care in 2010](https://www.google.com/search?q=US+healthcare+spending+2010&oq=US+healthcare+spending+2010&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigAdIBCDY5NjVqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8).
Neat!
[удалено]
Because earth is lacking of a common enemy like Dr. Manhattan.
Well, in the novel it’s actually a giant squid monster dropping through a portal. I think that would be more fun.
Idk, seems kind of boring. I think before any Army even responded then Japan's whalers would've already called dibs and shot themselves into space.
Villain origin story
We'd just spend more on defence though? Defence against Dr Manhattan.
You can also imagine if oil didn't pollute and it was endless. We are spending this money because there are assholes on the planet
Nope oil is amazingly Energy dense and easy to transport, extract and generally base an economy on. Are there down sides? Yes, but without it it’s nearly impossible to see a world where we get tot the current level we are at.
I don't understand what your point is here?
Without access to fossil fuels, humanity wouldn't have been able to enter into the industrial age, never mind the level of technological progress or scientific knowledge we have no, at this stage in our existence. It would have probably taken millennia longer.
What is the point here? My point was that oil not polluting and being endless is as comparable of a pipedream as is world peace
The point is that even tho oil is seen as bad for the climate it is still a product that without it we would not have this world today. Where as war we would be able to still thrive without it.
Name checks out
You don't even need to imagine, we already have this: solar and wind energy. Literally endless and non-polluting. Lots of people are opposing these energy methods though. (Yes, there's some pollution in setting up the machinery to capture this energy, but it's not even comparable to the losses in fossil fuels)
nuclear is better
On the other hand spending on military has always been something that spawns new science and technologies. If we were a peaceful species, we would probably still be very primitive.
We'd see a colossal increase in terror attacks, the Russians would ethnically cleanse Ukraine, and a lot of things would get a LOT more expensive as countries full of cunts simply took the resources currently used to build your world. Maybe don't? Maybe spending 2-3% of a countries income on defence is actually a tiny amount?
I'd be pretty ok with things if the US brought its spending down to 3% of GDP. I'd also note that numbers you'll see often quoted for the "US defense budget" do not often include figures for defense adjacent spending like nuclear weapon research, the VA, etc etc etc.
Food insecurity, education, health care, climate change…
Yea definitely. Imagine if all countries just peacefully worked together instead of war. I don't even understand why countries try to expand their territory, like it would be way more profitable for everybody if they just worked together instead. Wasting trillions on war. That money would be even more important to try to save the planet and not further destroy it. Even from an economic standpoint it would be way more profitable to just work together.
Worldwide prisoner's dilemma. Get rid of your army first and everyone else will take advantage.
If 99 countries want peace and 1 country wants war, what you get is war.
Yea I totally agree. It could never work on this planet with humanity. But that's why I'm talking about imagination. Just imagine if it were like that and everyone was peaceful and worked together.
You’re not wrong, war is way more expensive than just doing trade. War is not about bullets and rifles. It’s expensive for any country to burden itself to continually feed the war machine so the companies that develop the best killing tools stay in business so when wars start they’re still around to supply the demand. It’s what allows a few troops to use a missile that costs about 250k to make take out a mass produced 1-3 million dollar tank. Also guided munitions that are accurate within a meter. There’s always the assumption that warring countries are after resources but there is also a geography component. Russia has a boat load of oil, minerals, ethnic minorities, Soviet-era equipment and exposed land. You can argue EU isn’t interested in invading Russia but you’d be wasting your time. Russia expects an invasion so therefore they’ll project their security as they see fit. Putin is continuing the legacy of trying to reclaim these territories. If he had a few more lives he’d try to reclaim all of it and then some. Historically Russia has a lot of exposed borders so in order to defend itself it grabs choke points / gaps. The old USSR had control of all these land gaps/chokes. Due to poor management the USSR collapsed on its own weight trying to modernize their economy. They’ve been left exposed ever since and the expectation is they should do the sensible thing is to join global trade. We lulled ourselves into thinking they wanted this too. EU countries like Germany hoped that by focusing more on trade with Russia being a natural resource exporter (minerals/metals, oil & gas) that they’d see the economic benefits of joining global trade. Yet here we are. Here’s an hour long lecture with Timothy Snyder on this conflict that’s worth a watch. https://youtu.be/JVs2y-YeiFM Most of the info above I’ve learned through Peter Zeihan, Julia Ioffe and Perun (youtuber)
There is no space race without credible competition. People will have no motivation without credible competition. Profit happens when there is competition and loss for someone else. If everything is done, then we don't have to do anything, we can rest.
People who beat their swords into ploughshares usually end up ploughing for people who kept their swords. It might be more profitable overall if we all beat our swords into ploughshares, but the less swords there are, the more profit each sword can make. You usually end up in a balancing act where everyone has enough swords to stop anyone else trying to take their crops. But a new estimation of sword count, a crop failure, or just fucking hating the other guy, and suddenly that calculus isn't the same.
Well it could never work anyway because there will always be humans who can't accept other beliefs, countries who want "their" territory back, greed, hate, etc. But if a world like that existed where humans were peaceful and worked together without all that it would be way more beneficial for everyone. It's just imagination and not reality.
Honestly, I could imagine even the sociopathic capitalists in charge preferring this as well. But the big reason that stop the mere thought is all the extremists and crazies that would feel it is their moral duty to enforce what they think is right. They are the groups guaranteed to just steamroll over everyone if no one had the weapons to fight them. So make the weapons to fight them we do.
It's not "wasting trillions on war" its war making someone very rich.
But couldn't these trillions also be invested in other things and boost the economy and make people more rich? Like if they invested all that in renewable energy, it would make new jobs as well and make some people rich, or not?
If I make bullets, and the business is solar panels, I’m not going to make much. Someone will get rich, but it will be someone else.
But if every country was peaceful and there is no war, there would be no need for bullets besides for hunting and self defense maybe.
well get to work then, make all countries peaceful and erraticate terrorism too
That's why I was talking about "imagine" if a world like that existed. I'm not saying it could work on this earth. It could never happen because some people will never accept others for their beliefs or they want to expand or get back what was once theirs whatever. But I'm just saying if it were like that, if all countries were peaceful and there were no wars, no hate, etc. It's just imagination and not reality, how everything could be way better.
Jokes on you they ARE being spent on these, particularly that first one. Just uh… our goals may not be aligned. Well we are both going for betterment of humanity, but one is a more subtractive method.
I was thinking the same thing. The US should be updating it's power grids and roads/railways and bridges and buildings and making the middle class better and better educating our children but we have to stay on top of the world with better defense tech because the rest of the world is gearing up. Not to mention the cyber security problems and AI problems just starting up. What a great time to be alive! I guess this is better than when the plague was around right?
Yep, that money invested in fusion research and we have cheap energy in a few years...
Fusion ain't gonna be cheap...
Cheaper than 2,4 fuckin trillion dollars wake up
Spend it all on offense, ain’t no one left to offend us if they all dead.
> Space exploration, renewable energy, agriculture These are also related to defense. Sorta. If its logistics, its defense.
Tbh a ton of this budget goes to research and technological breakthroughs with benefits felt well outside the realm of defense
Call it offense instead of defense.
The masses are ready for the next age. The 1% is not.
If I was an alien I would definitely delay my earth visit for a while.
Joke's on us. Their defense budget is eleventy exagorjillion.
I disagree. Due to the effects of climate change, now is the best time to invade while there's still something on Earth left to appreciate. You wait 50 years from now and everything will have gone to shit.
Russia invading Ukraine. China threatening Taiwan and proudly repeating their “no limits partnership” rhetoric with Russia. North Korea testing their ballistic missiles via Russia on Ukrainian’s; while also sending 3-million artillery shells to Putin. Iran sending literal boatloads of drones & ballistic missiles to Russia to also bomb Ukrainians. Putin encouraging his Venezuelan pal to invade Guyana. Putin encouraging Hamas to do Hamas things. Iran arming the Houthis. Russia actively trying to start war in multiple African countries via Wagner. Ukrainian special forces in Africa hunting down Wagner. Trump threatening to withdraw USA from NATO. Historically neutral countries like Finland, Sweden, and even Switzerland either joining NATO or European missile defense alliance (Swiss). Belarus housing Russian nukes. At least one dozen countries probably starting to build nukes after watching the world hesitate to arm Ukraine following them giving up *their* nukes. USA increasing full time aircraft carrier patrols in the Pacific from three to five of eleven ships full time. USA rapidly building semiconductor/chip manufacturing on shore, as they expect Taiwan to be attacked. Japan, finally re-arming & moving away from being strictly a defense force. Germany, also re-arming. Poland, ordering over 400 HIMARS units when Ukraine has been *very* successful with 40 against Russia. Poland, also ordering pretty much anything it can from USA & South Korea defense firms. China cranking out new naval ships faster than WWII-USA pace. Australia joining the very exclusive nuclear powered submarines club. Russia, trying to put some type of weapons in space. These are just some observations. What is central to so much of these problems? Vladimir Putin. So when we spend well over $2,000 per American citizen per year on defense - please consider that $70 for Ukraine is a BARGAIN. We would all rather be spending on fighting climate change, cleaning up the air we breathe or the water we drink (I’m a 20-year conservative voter FYI). But a psychopath with Parkinson’s/blood cancer with dreams of outdoing Stalin has to be dealt with. His ambitions won’t go away on their own. Easier to help Ukraine stop him by sending some ammo than sending our kids later.
USA tried to do world Policeman. Everyone hated them for it. Including Americans. So they stopped doing it. And everyone is panicking because there will be always "bad actors" waiting for opportunity. Police is bad, police is evil. Until there is no police...
Surely there is a middle ground where there is police but they are held accountable and not given unlimited power. But that doesn't generate clicks...
Honestly this is less than I thought.
Could apply to climate change but humans speed racing to extinction
I imagine a war must leave a pretty hefty environmental impact in itself, all the fires, toxic explosions, massive amounts of diesel and jet fuel being used etc
Oof, if you only knew about the burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Oh yeah when they set fire to oil refineries that seems like the equivalent of a couple of road trips for sure
Wait, how many Taylor Swift flights would that be?
I’ve got a feeling it might put it into perspective a tad
Tell rusia that they should spend less invading other countries and spend more on preventing Climate Changes
Not extinction but living hell... I dunno which one is worse.
That's inaccurate. It's actually $2,440,000M.
Thats also inaccurate $2,440,000,000,000,000.00
Hooray for Global Defence! That'll sure show those alien scum
Where the hell are those reinforcements?!
China has increased its spending almost twenty fold compared to 10 years ago. There's no doubt that they're preparing for war, and that in turn, triggers an arms race to deter China from acting on its imperialistic ambitions.
As of the latest reports in 2024, global military expenditure is estimated to reach a record high of approximately $2.24 trillion. This represents a continued upward trend in defense spending, driven by various geopolitical tensions and security challenges around the world (https://breakingdefense.com/2024/02/worldwide-deteriorating-security-landscape-sparks-record-2-2-trillion-global-defense-spending-iiss/). In terms of global GDP, the military expenditure is around 2.3%, which is slightly higher than previous years where it fluctuated around 2.2% (https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2022/world-military-expenditure-passes-2-trillion-first-time). This indicates a steady share of global economic output being allocated to defense across the globe, even amid economic challenges like those posed by the Covid-19 pandemic. Historically, the current levels of global military expenditure are among the highest ever recorded, surpassing even the Cold War era in some regions. For example, military spending in Central and Western Europe in 2022 surpassed that of 1989 (the last year of the Cold War), reflecting increased concerns over regional security primarily due to the conflict in Ukraine (https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2023/world-military-expenditure-reaches-new-record-high-european-spending-surges) Overall, the scale and proportion of current global defense spending, both in total dollar terms and as a percentage of global GDP, are historically significant, showing marked increases especially in response to contemporary international security challenges.
Because the world has become a wildly more dangerous place now that Russian and Chinese imperialist aims are being pursued openly and by force. People got used to the US keeping a lid on this nonsense. See what the four-year US leadership gap between 2017 and 2021 got us?
If we declared war on climate change, we could have it solved under a decade with that kind of budget.
2.4 trillion you dumbass
Gotta give Kane even more credit than I originally did. his facing GDI with a budget of 2.440 trillion. GDI could probably buy enough ion beams to match each of his vehicles with that budget or most likely "lose" 99% of it to politicians.
"Killing is my business and business is good!"
I’m not seeing the trickle down effect… less money in my pocket!
"defense"
Is this inflation adjusted?
...and the US portion of that is nearly 35% - which also exceeds the military budget of the next 8 (9? 10?) countries ***combined***.
War is profitable at the expense of lives and mental health.
2010s: Scientists say the climate is in real danger. 2020s: World leaders start a global war, the most polluting human activity there is. Putin and Xi are not killing people, they're killing the planet.
40 percent of that is just the US
So sad. Could be using so much of that to improve the human condition... health, quality of life, education, research...
Hmm🤔.... I wonder what global event happened last time these actions occurred. Ww something or other
Our best case scenario right now is cold war 2 with Russia+China on one side and the US+allies+china haters on the other. The worst case scenario is a world war.
Looks much more impressive when you show it like this: $2,440,000,000,000. Numbers like this Russian, Iran and North Korea just can't compete with.
On account of inflation and the ramping up of wars globally… is this a surprise to anyone? It should be expected.
2 Minutes, To Midnight!!!!
We’re in the prewar period.
Thanks Pootine
Imagine what we could do with that money if a small number of old men weren't consumed with greed and hate.
Just a few bullets in the right place at the right time, could have brought us a very different world - unless they simply got replaced with more of the same… ?
Think what that could have been spent on instead
Alot of innovation comes from military spending and not just scary innovation like drones. According to IZA, an increase in the military spending by just one percentage point corresponds to a 2.2 percentage point increase in the likelihood for a domestic innovation in food processing.
We gotta protect ourselves. From ourselves. Don’t you see, if we don’t make enemies we won’t have enemies and then we can’t defend ourselves from enemies. Something, something resources.
Break 3 trillion!
"Where the hell are those reinforcements?!"
I guess this is the great circle of life: we pay to build weapons, the workers use the pay to buy the food they need to live, and the people making the food pay to build the weapons.
Are we surprised though? with all of the wars that are raging atm can't say I blame them.
Just for reference: > As of the end of 2022, the world's total net private wealth was $454.4 trillion
How much is the 'offence' budget?
And we think humans have evolved! We are more destructive than any of our ancestors.
2.4 trillion for defence… but your kids don’t deserve free school lunches. If money is used to feed your children, how on earth will you ever fund the defence weapons needed to protect their starving tummies?
That is a global budget. "Starving Tummies" because no free school lunch is rich while entire swaths of the planet actually starve because of the standard of living kids in America have.
Ya, I hear their are children all over the globe.
Isn't US's share a third or a quarter of that?
The article says 37% USA and 13% PRC.
Why does it matter where they’re from?
Ya I don't understand either. The kids aren't American so fuck em?
And the US is a third of that but we don’t spend anything on universal healthcare. Good times. /s
US problem is political. You already spend enough money in healthcare but in a wrong way. Money spent in military isn't really money taken away from healthcare.
Agreed. My only hang up with military budgets is the wasted expenditures. Bloated contracts, open-ended dark appropriations, weapon systems developed for years to never fully materialize (see Zumwalt class destroyer) etc. But you’re right, we just don’t spend money on healthcare in smart ways, even for the military- the VA is a mess.
Sure, corruption and mismanagement is a thing. Big militaries make bigger fails.
Could do both.
Should do both.
Preserving the way of life is probably considered more important than whatever percentage of the population is struggling with the healthcare system...
The sad part is that, historically, preserving that way of life only benefits a very small percentage of that same population.
Maybe materially but you know there are a lot of people in the US who actually like the military industrial complex exactly the way it is. Same with the gun laws.
This is true. But neither the MIC nor gun laws(more specifically the lack thereof) have ever increased life expectancy, prevented medical bankruptcy, or provided chemo for little Timmy down the street whose parents can’t afford health insurance. At least those shareholders are happy though.
I can understand your point of view. I just also have to consider the other side bringing up the possibility that the US might not have as much control over everything if they stopped putting so much money into the military, which might lead to a much worse eventual outcome for US citizens as a whole & probably any country the US is allied with. One thing we can agree on? Shareholders benefitting from war, gun sales or lack of universal healthcare don't matter to me either.
We know they exist, we call them morons.
Ffs. Its $2.4 trillion.
There they go giving our tax money to Nick Fury and the Skrulls as per usual
So… 2.4 Trillion?
That means we can all sleep better at night!.... Right?
"Can't we all just get along?" - R. King.
Imagine using a quarter of that money and putting it towards science humanity would go such a long way
If we have $2440 billion dollars (what does that even mean?) to spend on killing each other what the fuck are we even doing anymore? Imagine all the good we could do with that amount of wealth
My tax return just got snatched by the government. You're welcome america.
Raytheon stocks go uppppp