Half of all the world's defense spending

Fred Kaplan breaks down the real cost of the defense budget and what's really in it, and concludes,

Congress exposes this budget to virtually no scrutiny, fearing that any major cuts—any serious questions—will incite charges of being "soft on terror" and "soft on defense." But $536 billion of this budget—the Pentagon's base line plus the discretionary items for the Department of Energy and other agencies—has nothing to do with the war on terror. And it's safe to assume that a fair amount has little to do with defense. How much it does and doesn't is a matter of debate. Right now, nobody's even debating.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said recently that, quite apart from the wars, the nation should get used to spending 4 percent of its gross domestic product on defense. This isn't an unreasonable sum in terms of what the nation can afford. But the same could be said of many other functions of government. It has very little to do with what the nation needs. The $515.4 billion in the base line Defense Department budget amounts to 3.4 percent of GNP. Is that not enough? Should we throw in another $85 billion to boost it to 4 percent? The relevant question, in any case, should be not how much we spend, but what we buy.

The Chinese people may someday resent the bargain their government has made in keeping Americans awash in flat screen TVs while they go without functioning sewer systems. Will the American people someday similarly awaken and decide that $300 billion might be better spent on health care than on the F-35 aircraft program?

As Kaplan would say, I know, the question answers itself.

But, sheeut, I know we're suckers for a good flyover, but its nuts, and has been getting worse the past eight years.