Skip to main content

What would happen if we didn't have a military?

It would be wonderful to live in a world in which we did not need a military, but not having one would subject us and our allies to considerable risk, as well as some rather severe economic consequences. Sadly, often what prevents one country from attacking another country is simply the fact that the country can defend itself against attack, subjecting the attacking country to casualties and material loss, and that the attacked country can retaliate, with the same consequences. I would say that to a large degree, this is what has kept the world more peaceful than it otherwise would be. Without a military, we cannot properly defend our borders, nor can we help those allies to whom we have commitments to defend. Economically, not having a military is problematic, too. Military expenditure is about 4.35% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). That might sound like a small number, but this year, this spending is over $600 billion. Contractors who supply the military with everything from weaponry to food would have no market, and hundreds of thousands of people would be unemployed, between contractors, military personnel, and civilian employees.  Thus, we would be a defenseless country with severe economic problems. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...