Changes

==Percentage of GDP==

==Percentage of GDP==

But even the strongest of nations cannot afford to bankrupt capital robustness, social harmony, and a balanced economy with over-expenditure on affairs military.  Gibbon's ''Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire''<ref>[http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FDecline-Fall-Roman-Empire%2Fdp%2F0375758119%2Fsr%3D1-2%2Fqid%3D1168701724%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks&tag=mywikibizcom-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325 The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire], Edward Gibbon, Modern Library.</ref> advises a 1/100 ratio for military to all other pursuits for a healthy society.  Philip Pugh, in ''The Cost of Seapower'',<ref>[http://www.alibris.com/search/detail.cfm?S=R&bookbin=8953230898&bid=8953230898&siteID=OmE0YUiQlCg-PltUy0_uDNmOHFHQdxVsgQ The Cost of Seapower], Philip Pugh, [[Directory:Conway Maritime Press|Conway Maritime Press]].</ref> suggests a more reasonable estimate for peacetime expenditures for the military: 2%-6% of the [[Gross Domestic Product]] (GDP).  Pugh insists on the importance of wealth, not necessarily resources, in maintaining a strong navy.  He argues that in the industrial age, the factor more central than any other in increasing the costs of building a navy is worker wages.  As the industrial (and computer) age advanced, spiraling costs of technologies and resources were offset somewhat by reduced factory labor requirements.  Even the ratio of sailors to the unit-cost of a vessel has steadily gone down, due to the implementation of manpower-saving equipment on board.  This all illustrates the close tie between military readiness and consumer comfort.

But even the strongest of nations cannot afford to bankrupt capital robustness, social harmony, and a balanced economy with over-expenditure on affairs military.  Gibbon's ''Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire''<ref>[http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FDecline-Fall-Roman-Empire%2Fdp%2F0375758119%2Fsr%3D1-2%2Fqid%3D1168701724%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks&tag=mywikibizcom-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325 The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire], Edward Gibbon, Modern Library.</ref> advises a 1/100 ratio for military to all other pursuits for a healthy society.  Philip Pugh, in ''The Cost of Seapower'',<ref>[https://www.amazon.com/Cost-Seapower-Influence-Affiars-Present/dp/0851774199 The Cost of Seapower], Philip Pugh, [[Directory:Conway Maritime Press|Conway Maritime Press]].</ref> suggests a more reasonable estimate for peacetime expenditures for the military: 2%-6% of the [[Gross Domestic Product]] (GDP).  Pugh insists on the importance of wealth, not necessarily resources, in maintaining a strong navy.  He argues that in the industrial age, the factor more central than any other in increasing the costs of building a navy is worker wages.  As the industrial (and computer) age advanced, spiraling costs of technologies and resources were offset somewhat by reduced factory labor requirements.  Even the ratio of sailors to the unit-cost of a vessel has steadily gone down, due to the implementation of manpower-saving equipment on board.  This all illustrates the close tie between military readiness and consumer comfort.

The often-made comparison between Germany and Britain in [[World War Two]] is appropriate here.  Faced with the crisis of war, Brits under the leadership of [[Winston Churchill]] were able to divert perhaps 40% of their GDP to the defense burden, thereby accepting a 30% drop in the standard of living by 1942 and nearly a 50% drop by 1943.  Conversely, the German economy under [[Adolf Hitler]] was manipulated in such a way that the population was not to feel a drop in its standard of living until 1943, and then a drop of only perhaps 15%.  This consumer happiness was achieved at the expense of, among other things, a lazy shipbuilding program.  Thus, the [[Battle of the Atlantic]] might have been decided in large part by home-front sacrifice and vigorous application of funds to the Royal Navy.

The often-made comparison between Germany and Britain in [[World War Two]] is appropriate here.  Faced with the crisis of war, Brits under the leadership of [[Winston Churchill]] were able to divert perhaps 40% of their GDP to the defense burden, thereby accepting a 30% drop in the standard of living by 1942 and nearly a 50% drop by 1943.  Conversely, the German economy under [[Adolf Hitler]] was manipulated in such a way that the population was not to feel a drop in its standard of living until 1943, and then a drop of only perhaps 15%.  This consumer happiness was achieved at the expense of, among other things, a lazy shipbuilding program.  Thus, the [[Battle of the Atlantic]] might have been decided in large part by home-front sacrifice and vigorous application of funds to the Royal Navy.