Transcript Military spending update and philippines update

Military spending
Arms suppliers
Source: Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute
Philippines update
• There is great unevenness in the distribution of
wealth in the Philippines. A small percentage of the
population is very wealthy while the majority of the
people are very poor. The richest 10% of the
population share over one third of the wealth while
the poorest 10% share only 2.3% with 40% living
below the poverty line. Nearly 10% of GDP is from
Filipinos working overseas.
•
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwNtQXMqznY
• 90 million
people
• 40 percent
in poverty
• 1.5 million
homeless
street kids
The economy of the Philippines is the 4th largest economy in South East Asia
and the 33rd largest economy in the world by purchasing power parity according to
the International Monetary Fund in 2010. A newly industrialized emerging market
economy, it posted a real GDP growth rate of 5.3% in 2006 and 7.1% in 2007.
Growth slowed to 3.8% in 2008 as a result of the global financial crisis. In 2009,
the real growth rate was 0.9%. The Philippine economy grew by 7.3% in 2010,
which several reports described as the fastest growth in 24 years.
Update Philippines
•
There is a high incidence of child prostitution in tourist areas. An undetermined
number of children are forced into exploitative labor operations.
•
The Philippines is the fourth country with the most number of prostituted children, and
authorities have identified an increase in pedophiles travelling to the Philippines.
•
There are estimated to be 375,000 women and girls in the sex trade in the
Philippines, mostly between the ages of 15 and 20, though some are as young as 11.
•
The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies state that
there are more than 1.5 million street children in the Philippines and many end up in
prostitution and drug trafficking in places such as Manila and Angeles City.
•
Government and NGO estimates on the number of women trafficked range from
300,000 to 400,000 and the number of children trafficked range from 60,000 to
100,000.
•
According to the US government reports, the number of child victims in the
Philippines range from 20,000 to 100,000, with foreign tourists, particularly other
Asians, as perpetrators.
Who will have the most influence on economic priorities and distribution of
resources such as education, land, health care, etc. Who will be given the
highest priority in the decision making processes?
Source: SIPRI Yearbook 2009, Note: Some countries are excluded
because of lack of data or consistent time series data.
Source: SIPRI Yearbook 2009, Table 5A.1, see also The SIPRI military
expenditure database.
Defense Spending & The Military
Budget
• Congress and the White House allocate $522 billion a year to the
Defense Budget.
(In 2008 the U.S. spent $607 billion)
To put the level of U.S. Defense Spending in perspective.
• $30 billion is the annual shortfall to eliminate starvation and
malnutrition globally.
• $12 billion is the annual shortfall to provide education for every kid
on earth.
• $15 billion is the annual shortfall to provide access to water and
sanitation.
• $23 billion is the annual shortfall to reverse the spread of AIDS and
Malaria.
Source: World Bank
• During the eight-year presidency of
George W. Bush, US military expenditure
increased to the highest level in real terms
since World War II, mostly due to the wars
in Afghanistan and Iraq.
• This increase has contributed to soaring
budget deficits.
• The conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have
been funded primarily through emergency
supplemental appropriations outside the
regular budgetary process and have been
financed through borrowing.
The five largest suppliers of major conventional weapons, 2004–2008
Share of
global arms
exports (%)
Main recipients
(share of supplier's)
transfers)
USA
31
South Korea (15%)
Israel (13%)
UAE (11%)
Russia
25
China (42%)
India (21%)
Algeria (8%)
Germany
10
Turkey (15%)
Greece (13%)
South Africa (12%)
France
8
UAE (32%)
Singapore (13%)
Greece (12%)
UK
4
USA (21%)
India (14%)
Chile (9%)
Supplier
• Since 2005 there has been an upward trend in deliveries
of major conventional arms world wide.
• The annual average for 2004–2008 was 21 per cent
higher than for 2000–2004.
• The United States and Russia remained by far the
largest exporters, followed by Germany, France and the
United Kingdom.
• Together these five countries accounted for 79 per cent
of the volume of exports for 2004–2008.
• They have been the top five suppliers since the end of
the cold war and have accounted for at least threequarters of all exports annually.
• East Asia, Europe and the Middle East
continued to be the largest recipient
regions for 2004–2008, each accounting
for about 20 per cent of all imports.
• China remained the single largest recipient
for the period 2004–2008, followed by
India, the United Arab Emirates (UAE),
South Korea and Greece.
• Global arms production continued to increase in
2007.
• The combined arms sales of the SIPRI Top 100
arms-producing companies reached $347 billion
• an increase of 11 per cent in nominal terms and
5 per cent in real terms over 2006.
• Since 2002 the value of the Top 100 arms sales
has increased by 37 per cent in real terms.
• Forty-four US companies accounted for 61
per cent of the Top 100’s arms sales in
2007
• 32 West European companies accounted
for 31 per cent of the sales.
• Russia, Japan, Israel and India accounted
for most of the rest.
• Thirty companies increased their arms
sales by more than 30 per cent in 2007.
The pie chart below is the
government view of the budget.
It includes Trust Funds
(e.g., Social
Security).
The expenses of past
military spending
are not
distinguished from
nonmilitary
spending.
If the government does not have enough money to finance a war (or spending for
its hefty military budgets), they borrow through loans, savings bonds, and so
forth. This borrowing (done heavily during World War II and the Vietnam War)
comes back in later years as "hidden" military spending through interest
payments on the national debt.
The figures are federal funds,
which do not include trust
funds — such as Social
Security — that are raised
and spent separately from
income taxes.
The government practice of
combining trust and
federal funds began during
the Vietnam War, thus
making the human needs
portion of the budget seem
larger and the military
portion smaller.
War Resisters League version of the budget
• The U.S. Government says that military spending
amounts to 20% of the budget, the Center for
Defense Information (CDI) reports 51%, the
Friends Committee on National Legislation
(FCNL) reports 43%, and the War Resisters
League claims 54%. Why the variation?
• Different groups have different purposes in how
they present the budget figures.
• WRL’s goal has been to show the percentage of
money that goes to the military (current and past)
so that people paying — or not paying — their
federal taxes would know what portion of their
payments are military-oriented.
• U.S. Military Spending vs. The World U.S. military
spending – Dept. of Defense plus nuclear weapons (in
$billions) – is equal to the military spending of the next
15 countries combined.
• Some say that U.S. military spending will naturally be
higher because it has the highest Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) of any country.
• The United States accounts for 47 percent of the world’s
total military spending, however the U.S.’s share of the
world's GDP is about 21 percent.
• Also note that of the top 15 countries, at least 12 are
considered allies of the U.S.
• The U.S. outspends Iran and North Korea by a ratio of
72 to one.
• Source: Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation,
http://old.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002279.php;
our graph uses a more comparable figure of $515 from
actual 2006 U.S. military spending
Questions
• What might these figures tell us about generalized,
balanced, or negative reciprocity as economic
strategies?
• What might happen if at least some of the money
used for military was used to build relationships
through reciprocity?
• Does military spending in this quantity reflect a
gender bias if we apply the theories about female
and male priorities in regard to power and
resources? Why or why not?