[credit_guy]

> military-industrial complex

Here's a link [1] to the list with the world's richest persons. Can you tell me how many of them made their fortunes in the military-industrial business?

To spare you a click, here's the top 10: Bezos, Arnault, Musk, Gates, Zuckerberg, Buffet, Ellison, Page, Ortega, Brin. Tech (7), fashion (2) and finance (1). You can go on and on. I'd be very curious at what position you can find a military-industrial billionaire.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/#31614dc93d78

[oh_sigh]

This doesn't seem to refute any kind of point made by Ike or OP. It's quite possible for a military-industrial complex to exist and it only generates a bunch of little rich people(20-100M), since the government spreads its patronage out over a large section of the population instead of tech which concentrates wealth into single individuals. If one person is reaping most of the rewards, it's easy to knock down the system. If a lot of people are benefiting a little bit, you'll have far more supporters for your policies.

[nickpinkston]

Yes, exactly. Most mature industries are no longer run by the founders who own a lot of stock, but professional management with far less compensation.

The real questions about the military industrial complex are:

(1) Are we producing the right systems for today's defense environment? (hard to say)

(2) Are we doing this cost effectively for the country? (not at all)

(3) Is the structure of the industry healthy to best achieve 1&2 without being subject to regulatory capture / corruption? (It's an oligopoly of rent seekers with a revolving door between the gov't and industry, so very likely not)

Whether it makes people rich is beside the point. The question is whether it makes us safe at a fair price. It doesn't seem like you can say it does so.

[bitwize]

Might want to look up how Silicon Valley came to be called Silicon Valley, and how it came to be a tech hub. Bezos and Zuckerberg may not be the CEO of Raytheon, but that doesnpt mean MIC money wasn't involved in making their vast fortunes.

[vagrantJin]

It might not be a good look to flaunt wealth by way of being a weapons maker. Much less weapons used by government.

[opnitro]

Yet, despite that, military spending dominates government budgets in the US.

[dragonwriter]

> Yet, despite that, military spending dominates government budgets in the US.

Only when you ignore the nearly 2/3 of spending that is “mandatory spending” and focus exclusively on “discretionary spending" does military dominate; it's about 1/6 of overall spending; healthcare, which is a major component of mandatory spending and also has some share of discretionary is about a time and half as much.

US has enormous per GDP, and even moreso per capita, defense spending, there's no need to exaggerate it's significance.