The Fiscal Limits of the Warfare-Welfare State: Defense and Welfare Spending in the United States Since 1900

J. Clayton
{"title":"The Fiscal Limits of the Warfare-Welfare State: Defense and Welfare Spending in the United States Since 1900","authors":"J. Clayton","doi":"10.1177/106591297602900304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"TT IS widely believed among scholars that defense spending in A-merica is excessively high and has gained an undue influence in setting national priorities which adversely affect our welfare programs. Some writers maintain defense expenditures are excessive because our defense effort has required a reduction in more desirable social welfare programs.' Others argue that in recent years our military system has become \"economically non-productive\" and causes stagnation and therefore rising welfare costs in the civilian sector.2 Still others believe that excessive and \"wasteful\" defense expenditures are deliberately planned and necessary for a capitalist system to survive.3 Finally, a substantial number of analysts simply believe that the fear of an external threat upon which defense budgets are based is grossly exaggerated, and, conversely, that welfare needs have been underestimated. Both our pacifistic and Judaeo-Christian t-raditions support this position. Those who argue for these propositions usually do so on the basis of a single and quite broad definition of defense spending and a fairly narrow definition of welfare spending. Moreover, the basis of funding is almost always limited to the federal budget. This method, of course, includes virtually all defense-related expenditures, but excludes much of the thrust of state and local welfare-related programs which have been rising almost as fast as federal outlays. These studies also focus on recent years and do not examine long-term trends in either defense or welfare spending. This essay will attempt to expand the number of working definitions of both defense and welfare spending, and compare the spending patterns derived by those different methods since these data first became available. In addition, a method of measurement common to both welfare and defense spending will be developed for purposes of better comparison. It is hoped that, by using a variety of definitions and methods of measurement and a more extensive longitudinal focus, the reader may gain a much more comprehensive picture of the interrelationship between defense spending and welfare spending in the United States and thereby be better able to determine whether either or both are excessive. Finally, I shall argue that our rapidly rising social welfare expenditure trends are far more unsettling than our shrinking defense commitments.","PeriodicalId":83314,"journal":{"name":"The Western political quarterly","volume":"19 1","pages":"364 - 383"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1976-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Western political quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591297602900304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

TT IS widely believed among scholars that defense spending in A-merica is excessively high and has gained an undue influence in setting national priorities which adversely affect our welfare programs. Some writers maintain defense expenditures are excessive because our defense effort has required a reduction in more desirable social welfare programs.' Others argue that in recent years our military system has become "economically non-productive" and causes stagnation and therefore rising welfare costs in the civilian sector.2 Still others believe that excessive and "wasteful" defense expenditures are deliberately planned and necessary for a capitalist system to survive.3 Finally, a substantial number of analysts simply believe that the fear of an external threat upon which defense budgets are based is grossly exaggerated, and, conversely, that welfare needs have been underestimated. Both our pacifistic and Judaeo-Christian t-raditions support this position. Those who argue for these propositions usually do so on the basis of a single and quite broad definition of defense spending and a fairly narrow definition of welfare spending. Moreover, the basis of funding is almost always limited to the federal budget. This method, of course, includes virtually all defense-related expenditures, but excludes much of the thrust of state and local welfare-related programs which have been rising almost as fast as federal outlays. These studies also focus on recent years and do not examine long-term trends in either defense or welfare spending. This essay will attempt to expand the number of working definitions of both defense and welfare spending, and compare the spending patterns derived by those different methods since these data first became available. In addition, a method of measurement common to both welfare and defense spending will be developed for purposes of better comparison. It is hoped that, by using a variety of definitions and methods of measurement and a more extensive longitudinal focus, the reader may gain a much more comprehensive picture of the interrelationship between defense spending and welfare spending in the United States and thereby be better able to determine whether either or both are excessive. Finally, I shall argue that our rapidly rising social welfare expenditure trends are far more unsettling than our shrinking defense commitments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
战争-福利国家的财政限制:1900年以来美国的国防和福利支出
学者们普遍认为,美国的国防开支过高,并在制定国家优先事项方面产生了不应有的影响,这对我们的福利计划产生了不利影响。一些作者认为,国防开支过高,因为我们的国防努力要求削减更令人满意的社会福利项目。另一些人则认为,近年来,我们的军事体系在经济上已经变得“非生产性”,导致了民用部门的停滞,从而导致了福利成本的上升还有一些人认为,过度和“浪费”的国防开支是刻意计划的,是资本主义制度生存所必需的最后,相当数量的分析人士只是认为,国防预算所依据的对外部威胁的恐惧被严重夸大了,相反,福利需求被低估了。我们的和平主义和犹太-基督教传统都支持这一立场。那些支持这些主张的人通常是基于一个单一的、相当宽泛的国防开支定义和一个相当狭隘的福利开支定义。此外,资金的基础几乎总是限于联邦预算。当然,这种方法实际上包括了所有与国防有关的支出,但不包括州和地方福利相关项目的大部分支出,这些项目的增长速度几乎与联邦支出一样快。这些研究也只关注最近几年,没有考察国防或福利支出的长期趋势。本文将尝试扩大国防和福利支出的工作定义的数量,并比较自这些数据首次可用以来,由这些不同方法得出的支出模式。此外,为了更好地进行比较,将制定一种衡量福利和国防开支的共同方法。希望通过使用各种定义和测量方法以及更广泛的纵向关注,读者可以更全面地了解美国国防开支和福利开支之间的相互关系,从而能够更好地确定其中一方或两者是否过度。最后,我要指出,我们迅速增加的社会福利支出趋势远比我们不断缩减的国防承诺更令人不安。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Judicial decision making and biological fact: Roe v. Wade and the unresolved question of fetal viability. Bicameralism and the Theory of Voting Party, Ideology, and the Lure of Victory: Iowa Activists in the 1980 Prenomination Campaign Campaign Spending in Contests for Governor The End of Methodology? a Review Essay On Evaluation Research Methods
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1