Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (131826)	2/7/2001 12:09:07 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571370

combjelly, A more relevant figure might be how much we spend, adjusting salaries for cost of living in the various countries, versus, oh the top 5 most likely adversaries. Heck, the next 5 highest spenders might be an interesting comparison. It would be an interesting comparison. If you pay the 2.5 million Chinese in armed forces $50,000 per year each, you get $125 billion, but their official number for the entire military budget is $14.6 billion. I am not arguing that the US military budget should be doubled. The fact that it is half of the Reagan era spending, and 1/3 of the Kennedy era spending just shows how much money the defeat of the Soviet block was worth. Under Kennedy budget allocation, the military budget would be over $900 billion, vs. current $300 billion. So when I see a statement like Amy's that military spending is too high, I just wonder about the basis for that opinion. Joe