In the coming session of Congress there will be debates on military spending. There will be those who want to cut it to the bone or less; there will be those who are terrified of such cuts, believing we have to have a strong military. Let's consider some facts.
If the present conditions of our economy and the world's economy persist - which is highly unlikely - indications portend serious economic problems. Our gross domestic product may increase slightly, about 2.5 percent per year; that is by just over one quarter in 10 years. But China's GDP will have increased by 2.6 times. In other words, China's GDP will have grown - from $3,080 billion to some $10,455 billion. But our growth will have gone from $6,570 billion to only $8,410 billion.Thus China alone, without considering the other Asian countries, will have a vastly greater economy than we will have. Our government and businesses are doing all they can to see that it does happen that way. And I don't fault them; the Chinese people do need to have better living conditions.
We now spend about 5 percent of our GDP on the military. China and Japan now spend less than 1 percent of their GDP on their military. If we reduce our expenditure to 3 percent (the world's average) and China increases its to 3 percent, then in 10 years we will be spending $252 billion per year and China will be spending $270 billion per year.
Of course, it is not apt to happen just like that, But it is a fact that the United States is losing its position as the world's economic leader. If we cannot now support two military actions at the same time, what can we look forward to as the world's economic bases shift further?
And our basis must shift. Our debt dictates that it must. We no longer have the options we had before this massive buildup of debt spent on government do-good projects.
The Democrats and Republicans have been arguing over piddling things that in the long run will not count much, while the frightening things that seriously endanger our economy and therefore our livelihoods are largely downplayed or ignored. They all promise to balance the budget and eliminate the debt while at the same time promising benefits for everyone. Does anyone believe them?
Robert W. English
Salt Lake City