Military Spending Analysis
Today the U.S. spends roughly $680 billion on its military, which in comparison, is 54% of the total $1.1 trillion the U.S. spends on average per year. It’s difficult to argue that having a strong military is not crucial, because in reality it is critical that a considerable amount of the government spending goes to the military to ensure the country’s safety. However, spending a significant amount of U.S.’s money on the military could begin to hurt the economy more over time if it comes at the expense of other important programs. It is necessary to the overall health of our country that the government takes a balanced approach to spending in order to benefit both the economy and the military.
Before WWI, the U.S. spent about 1% of its overall
budget on the military. During that time the government did not necessarily notice the need for an overly strong military force. That perspective began to change after the U.S. became involved in the First World War and global politics become more complex. Then, following the dramatic events of World War II, our government believed there was an even greater need for a strong military and was even more motivated to increase military spending to protect its national interests. The U.S. was especially concerned about the spread of communism and general political instability around the world. For example, with a stronger military the U.S. was able to be more active in global conflicts such as the Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. None of these events were ever fought on U.S. soil, but rather far away in small countries. From a budget standpoint, the government more than tripled military spending as a percent of the budget, going from only 1% back before World War I to averaging no less than 3.6% ever since.
On one hand it’s reasonable to say that U.S. did the right thing spending more on the military to ensure the safety of the general public; otherwise the U.S. might not be where it is today. The difference between the 1900s and today is that back then there was the communist threat spreading throughout the world. Being one of the world’s superpowers, the U.S. did not want to give up its spot and let communism take over, thus they built a bigger and better armed forces in response. Today, the U.S. does not have a war to fight, but still spends a great deal on military because of global instability. The U.S. in part spends so much to build its military to keep other countries in “check” as they develop nuclear weapons, engage in regional wars and foster terrorism.
However, overspending on the military takes money away from other matters that help the economy grow such as education and health care. While having a good military is important, a well-educated population is almost just as important. A more educated population makes for stronger economic growth in the long run, supplying the economy with a skilled workforce. Spending on education and health care is good for long-term growth, and at the same time spending on the military is good for protecting long-term growth. Therefore, the U.S. government should take a more balanced approach to spending on both the military and domestic economic expenses.
In conclusion, having a more balanced approach to spending money benefits the U.S.’s position in the world with the military, meanwhile building a strong, educated population under the protection of a strong military gives this investment a chance to thrive over time and produce economic rewards and advancements. With too much money going to the military, it is probable that the economy will suffer over time due to the lack of attention toward the public’s education and health care. With that, the U.S. economy will most likely thrive the most with a balanced approach toward the government spending.
Before WWI, the U.S. spent about 1% of its overall
budget on the military. During that time the government did not necessarily notice the need for an overly strong military force. That perspective began to change after the U.S. became involved in the First World War and global politics become more complex. Then, following the dramatic events of World War II, our government believed there was an even greater need for a strong military and was even more motivated to increase military spending to protect its national interests. The U.S. was especially concerned about the spread of communism and general political instability around the world. For example, with a stronger military the U.S. was able to be more active in global conflicts such as the Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. None of these events were ever fought on U.S. soil, but rather far away in small countries. From a budget standpoint, the government more than tripled military spending as a percent of the budget, going from only 1% back before World War I to averaging no less than 3.6% ever since.
On one hand it’s reasonable to say that U.S. did the right thing spending more on the military to ensure the safety of the general public; otherwise the U.S. might not be where it is today. The difference between the 1900s and today is that back then there was the communist threat spreading throughout the world. Being one of the world’s superpowers, the U.S. did not want to give up its spot and let communism take over, thus they built a bigger and better armed forces in response. Today, the U.S. does not have a war to fight, but still spends a great deal on military because of global instability. The U.S. in part spends so much to build its military to keep other countries in “check” as they develop nuclear weapons, engage in regional wars and foster terrorism.
However, overspending on the military takes money away from other matters that help the economy grow such as education and health care. While having a good military is important, a well-educated population is almost just as important. A more educated population makes for stronger economic growth in the long run, supplying the economy with a skilled workforce. Spending on education and health care is good for long-term growth, and at the same time spending on the military is good for protecting long-term growth. Therefore, the U.S. government should take a more balanced approach to spending on both the military and domestic economic expenses.
In conclusion, having a more balanced approach to spending money benefits the U.S.’s position in the world with the military, meanwhile building a strong, educated population under the protection of a strong military gives this investment a chance to thrive over time and produce economic rewards and advancements. With too much money going to the military, it is probable that the economy will suffer over time due to the lack of attention toward the public’s education and health care. With that, the U.S. economy will most likely thrive the most with a balanced approach toward the government spending.