Someone told me the other day that defense spending has skyrocketed in the past decade, so the sequestration's cut of $50 billion per year over the next 10 years would merely return us to the spending levels of very recent history.
While trying to verify this claim online, I came across this interesting article by Fox News which briefly compares America's pending defense cuts to the quickening military escalations of our enemies. Sounds bad, right? Well, not so much:
But others argue that even with the automatic cuts, the U.S. defense budget will still dwarf that of its adversaries and allies -- when considered as a raw amount, as opposed to a percentage of the country's economy.
"If you look at it on a global level, the overall U.S. military spending is roughly 40 percent of all the military spending in the world," said Peter Singer, a senior foreign policy fellow at Brookings Institution. "So if you imagine for every dollar spent on militaries in the world, 40 cents of it is spent by the U.S. And roughly about another 45 cents of it is spent by our allies. If sequestration happens, we go from spending about 40 cents out of every dollar to about 38 cents out of every dollar. So you decline, but not by this massive amount."
Taxpayers spent $711 billion on defense in 2011 -- the equivalent of the next 13 largest defense budgets combined.
The second largest defense budget in the world that year was China's, which officially is reported at $142.9 billion -- a sixth the size of the U.S. total.
What facts and figures would you like to add to these? What is not being said, or not being said enough, in TV news coverage of sequestration?