Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SodaWithoutSparkles t1_j1z7mzl wrote

US's budgets is higher than the other 9, combined

69

pastdecisions t1_j1zx8zj wrote

Only 4% of the gdp though. So compared to the percent of gdp, it's a lot less than other countries.

32

zoom100000 t1_j2055fs wrote

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/defense-spending-by-country

According to this the US is 16th in spending compared to GDP in 2020. Looking at the top 20-30, I can’t really say I feel like we’re in good company.

8

hitemlow t1_j20bnzf wrote

That's mostly because most of Europe doesn't meet NATO's minimum recommended defense spending.

23

Few_Time_7441 t1_j20dlve wrote

4% is double the minimum requirement.

5

ferrel_hadley t1_j20hbao wrote

>4% of the gdp though. So compared to the percent of gdp, it's a lot less than other countries.

3.3%ish. And most of the west relies on US logistics and intelligence.

Even as a European I would be happy for the US to spend less and the Europeans to build out more logistics capability. The UK is the only country with a reasonable airlift capacity. French operations in west Africa partially depend on that and the US.

16

hitemlow t1_j20gpa8 wrote

Yes, and 2% is the minimum. Should "developed" countries in Europe really be hitting just the minimum (of which they're not even meeting that) every year?

6

PandaDerZwote t1_j23eehs wrote

Seeing how Russia is fairing (which NATO is the explicit counterweight to), 2% seems high if anything.

0

Few_Time_7441 t1_j20hu19 wrote

Well, it's their budget. Nato is a US project, they were able to increase their sphere of influence due to it. Why would these smaller countries do more than they can get away with?

They can spend extra money on what they care about. Sound like a pretty smart and developed move.

−8

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_j21o6kg wrote

It's a great strategy for peacetime. I think a lot of European nations are rethinking it in light of Russian aggression.

8

protosser t1_j22b8hr wrote

And they'll never have to, the US isn't (can't) going to enforce it...because military bases (which the US has a lot of in Europe) are more important than NATO member spending the minimum

0

mr_ji t1_j21bfgs wrote

Bang for buck, I don't think anyone else even comes close. You could hand the actual dollar amount we spend to any other country and they couldn't produce a force with a fraction the capability.

4

zoom100000 t1_j21mh5s wrote

Got a source on that?

3

mr_ji t1_j21qn76 wrote

...a military career with heavy exposure to FMS, logistics, and strategic planning? You can't quantify the value or benefit of global military power projection, so obviously there isn't some peer-reviewed study to cite. However, the infrastructure of the U.S. military is light years ahead of anything else the world has ever seen. It's past the point that money is a limfac in what's possible or not.

5

zoom100000 t1_j21tit9 wrote

That’s fair thanks for sharing. I didn’t think your comment was completely outrageous, but definitely was a big statement to make.

3

D_is_for_Dante t1_j207dtr wrote

The US also has the largest airforce. Followed by the US Navy with the second largest.

28

topthrill08 t1_j214evs wrote

of the top five

  1. US airforce
  2. US Navy
  3. Russian Air Force (not sure how thats going these days)
  4. US Army
  5. US Marines
22

D_is_for_Dante t1_j214lix wrote

Holy shit I wasn’t aware that the army has its own batch of aircraft (I mean that’s what the airforce is for?). For the marines it makes sense I guess that they have their own.

8

topthrill08 t1_j218g9t wrote

for the army and marines I believe they have aircraft so they dont have to rely on another branch of the military that has different protocals and chain of commands. also Different Missions, Different Aircraft. Different Capabilities

7

mr_ji t1_j21b3my wrote

That's only going by number of aircraft. Going by value of aircraft, China and Russia are probably 2 and 3.

−2

topthrill08 t1_j21bntb wrote

That is probably true!. the marines are a great example. numerous smaller specialized aircraft.

2

garret1033 t1_j220wah wrote

What? Going by value of aircraft probably makes the ranking less weighed in favor of Russia and China, no?

2

fail-deadly- t1_j205od3 wrote

Even discount the larger U.S. economy, because we’re trying to project force around the world it is FAR more expensive than just trying to defend U.S. soil.

13

SodaWithoutSparkles t1_j22jn9s wrote

From an non-American perspective, sometimes I do think that the US is "invading" others in the name of "world peace". The middle-east is a great example. That's just my own thought tho. Not trying to start an argument as that would obviously be un-wise to do in an environment full of Americans

4

Ajek2760 t1_j20ztxh wrote

That's the gross dollar amount, what's more interesting is when you take into account PPP and what actually goes into a military budget (does coast guard get included? How about special projects like an aircraft carrier?)

5

thediesel26 t1_j20ibe7 wrote

Yes. Cuz it’s about what world peace costs, and the US is the only country wealthy enough to be able to guarantee this.

2

IAmDrNoLife t1_j22u8or wrote

Something that is never mentioned for these posts, is the value of money, or PPP. The value of 1 USD varies from country to country. In the EU, you might be able to get a tiny 2 cm piece of chocolate, while in Africa you can actually buy proper food. This applies for defence spending as well.

Furthermore, there is a lot of stuff that is not included in the e.g. Chinese defense budget, that IS however included in the US one (but stuff that China nonetheless spends money on). This should be corrected before one can make a proper comparison.

If one applies a modifier accounting for the PPP difference, then China is suddenly at $465 to $514 billion.

If one applies a modifier for both PPP and wage differences, then the equivalent budget would be around $882 to $988 billion.

Short video that goes over this, if one might be curious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o39SFpfr6E8

But well, do note. It's China. So numbers are only guesstimates.

2

timduhe t1_j22w0zq wrote

I'm more interested to see purchasing power, like what can 800B$ buy you in US vs what can 300B$ buy you in China.

I assume Chinese workers are paid like a lot less than US's, most materials in China should be cheaper so therefore difference might not be that huge.

Russia might be spending 65B$ but corruption is huge there, so who knows how much money really goes where it should go.

0