[OC] World collective security arrangements for the United States, China, and Russia, with each's share of world GDP.SHODANs_insect t1_j064mdk wrote
Reply to comment by MyaheeMyastone in [OC] World collective security arrangements for the United States, China, and Russia, with each's share of world GDP. by MST3KTFCCTRT
That doesn't necessarily mean much, though. There are states in the US that are bigger recipients of federal funds than contributors of federal funds. There are many ways to carve up populations to indicate that some people are getting a free ride.
The disappointing thing about the US is that it has the capacity to retain its current military spending and provide universal healthcare and more generous welfare policies - and it doesn't.
never_rains t1_j065fnr wrote
When it is the whole continent of Europe getting a free ride on US defense spending it becomes a problem. The problem was known but not acknowledged. Now even the Finnish PM accepts that European security is too dependent on US. Germans aren’t spending enough to defend themselves. UK has a decent navy but there army is too small to offer any challenge. French might be the only one doing enough in terms of land army.
SHODANs_insect t1_j065qcg wrote
>When it is the whole continent of Europe getting a free ride on US defense spending it becomes a problem.
What's the problem, exactly?
Because a moment ago it was that European nations could afford universal healthcare and generous welfare. The US can currently afford the same but chooses not to.
Are you moving the goalposts to another problem?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments