U.S. Defense Spending

[PhiPsiRuss]

I'm starting a new thread to discuss this. Many people on the left complain that U.S. military spending is soooo high, that its proof that the U.S. is an imperial power. These people measure defense spending in dollars and point out that the U.S. spends more than the rest of the world combined. No adjustment is made by people with this perspective for economic differences.

Then there are academics. Regardless of political beliefs, just about all political scientists and economists measure defense spending as a percentage of GDP. This way is much more intellectually honest. The U.S. is not even in the top 10 in defense spending as measured as a percentage of GDP. By historical standards, the current level of U.S. defense spending is rather low. There are a few ways to measure this. One is to simply look at the numbers since 1940.

This information is from here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...5/pdf/hist.pdf



Here are years, and the corresponding U.S. defense outlays as a percentage of GDP:

1940 1.7%
1941 5.6%
1942 17.8%
1943 37.0%
1944 37.8%
1945 37.5%
1946 19.2%
1947 5.5%
1948 3.5%
1949 4.8%
1950 5.0%
1951 7.4%
1952 13.2%
1953 14.2%
1954 13.1%
1955 10.8%
1956 10.0%
1957 10.1%
1958 10.2%
1959 10.0%
1960 9.3%
1961 9.4%
1962 9.2%
1963 8.9%
1964 8.5%
1965 7.4%
1966 7.7%
1967 8.8%
1968 9.4%
1969 8.7%
1970 8.1%
1971 7.3%
1972 6.7%
1973 5.8%
1974 5.5%
1975 5.5%
1976 5.2%
1977 4.9%
1978 4.7%
1979 4.6%
1980 4.9%
1981 5.1%
1982 5.7%
1983 6.1%
1984 5.9%
1985 6.1%
1986 6.2%
1987 6.1%
1988 5.8%
1989 5.6%
1990 5.2%
1991 4.6%
1992 4.8%
1993 4.4%
1994 4.0%
1995 3.7%
1996 3.5%
1997 3.3%
1998 3.1%
1999 3.0%
2000 3.0%
2001 3.0%
2002 3.4%
2003 3.7%

Another way to measure U.S. military spending is with comparitive politics. Paul Kennedy did this with his 1989 book, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. I haven't read this book in many years, but I remember how Dr. Kennedy compared how economic powers rose, and then fell. He quantified this with military spending as a percentage of GNP or GDP. He contended that economic powers came into being with very low defense spending, usually under 2%. These economic powers then became military powers. High defense spending caused a slow down in economic expansion, and other nations would surpass them. Typically, great military powers went into relative economic decline with sustained spending over 10%, often over 20%. Dr. Kennedy (a Yale historian) contended that sustained defense spending of over 7% (as I remember it) would equate with a sustained growth rate of barely over 1%. 5% defense spending would equal a 2% growth rate, 2% would equal 5%, and so on.

I need to get a copy of that book again, because I believe that his argument, while valid on some points, was flawed. Over the last decade, Japan has continued with a very low rate of defense spending, and they have not blown past the U.S. as Dr. Kennedy contended might happen if the U.S. didn't lower its defense spending to the 2% range (if I remember correctly.)

Also, there are other considerations like the export of military technology, and the spill over of military technology into the U.S. economy.

So U.S. defense spending is not that high at all. The U.S. has not fallen into relative decline, as predicted by Dr. Kennedy.

There's room for an increase in military spending.