A Challenge
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 08:08:39 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  A Challenge
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: A Challenge  (Read 1303 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,157
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2015, 01:41:50 PM »

Folks, foreign aid is like 1% of the budget or something. It's not the reason military spending is so insanely high.

Incidentally, some scholars of Welfare policy have argued that the US' very high military spending is so high because the military-industrial complex basically works as a welfare program, providing jobs and various benefits that alleviate poverty in some area, and compensate for the lack of social spending. Of course, this kind of spending is far less effective than it would be if the money was directly focused on actual welfare spending, but it's certainly an interesting way to look at it.

It is certainly the government's most significant jobs program, and a significant contribution to the economy of many places in the US.  That doesn't mean it's an efficient or sensible way to go about this, but it's hard for any social welfare program to replace that.  Just providing benefits without the jobs and the sense of purpose (of being part of the nation's defense, or of an economy which supports it) doesn't do the same thing for people.

As far as jobs are concerned, the easy solution is to increase the civil service in areas that would be more socially useful (health care, education, the postal service, etc) and to increase spending on infrastructure building, which, from what I've heard, is badly needed in the US.

Regarding the "sense of purpose", this is of cousr beyond the scope of public policy, but I must say it is a sad reflection of the US policy that serving your country as a soldier is valued so much more highly than serving your country in countless other ways.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,709
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2015, 02:20:25 PM »

Incidentally, some scholars of Welfare policy have argued that the US' very high military spending is so high because the military-industrial complex basically works as a welfare program, providing jobs and various benefits that alleviate poverty in some area, and compensate for the lack of social spending.

As tempting as this argument can be, it is incorrect as American military spending - including all the money showered on contractors and so on here as well - is not now and never has been concentrated in areas with severe social problems. Quite the opposite actually (a couple of well-known exceptions aside). There is often a link to politics (why, yes, Congressman Dan T. Porkburger Jr. is indeed very interested in the idea of a military base/major armaments factory being built in his district) but such things go on in other countries as well, if on a smaller scale.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,691
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2015, 03:10:33 PM »

Incidentally, some scholars of Welfare policy have argued that the US' very high military spending is so high because the military-industrial complex basically works as a welfare program, providing jobs and various benefits that alleviate poverty in some area, and compensate for the lack of social spending.

As tempting as this argument can be, it is incorrect as American military spending - including all the money showered on contractors and so on here as well - is not now and never has been concentrated in areas with severe social problems. Quite the opposite actually (a couple of well-known exceptions aside). There is often a link to politics (why, yes, Congressman Dan T. Porkburger Jr. is indeed very interested in the idea of a military base/major armaments factory being built in his district) but such things go on in other countries as well, if on a smaller scale.

There are plenty of military bases in areas with significant socioeconomic problems, even as they are not concentrated around them. Many places, even if they aren't at the low end of indicators, have become very dependent on the military presence and can face major problems if it leaves, which creates a serious problem to deal with in the midst of making military downsizing happen.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,709
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2015, 06:49:21 PM »

There are plenty of military bases in areas with significant socioeconomic problems, even as they are not concentrated around them. Many places, even if they aren't at the low end of indicators, have become very dependent on the military presence and can face major problems if it leaves, which creates a serious problem to deal with in the midst of making military downsizing happen.

Yeah, but that's just what you always get when an area becomes dependent on one big employer.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 12 queries.