China likely to unveil Defence spending for 2012 on this weekend

[Lankan Ranger]

China likely to unveil Defence spending for 2012 on this weekend

China likely to unveil Defence spending for 2012 on this weekend.

Beijing has not set a time to announce the yearly budget for the Chinese military, but it is releasing the number at a news conference preceding the annual parliament session, which this year opens on Monday.

In 2011 Chinese defense budget 601 billion yuan - 91.5 billion U.S. dollars

In 2011 - http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-03/04/c_13761030.htm

 

[ahfatzia]

I like to see $160 billion range, that's below 3% of her expected GDP. Many high tech areas need to catchup, and the Navy is still consider at her infancy as to what she needed.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I like to see $160 billion range, that's below 3% of her expected GDP. Many high tech areas need to catchup, and the Navy is still consider at her infancy as to what she needed.

Since most of our defence spending goes into our indigenous industries, it's not a problem to spend a larger percentage of GDP.

Since all the money is going straight back into China.

This will provide a multiplier effect for our economy, creating jobs and increasing our technological base.

 

[sweetgrape]

I like to see $160 billion range, that's below 3% of her expected GDP. Many high tech areas need to catchup, and the Navy is still consider at her infancy as to what she needed.

2011 GDP is 7.4trillion dollars, 2012 GDP, I predict, is about 8.6~8.8 trillion dollars. So $160 billion is not too much. But I think the 2012 Defence spending is about $120~130 billion.

 

[ahfatzia]

Since most of our defence spending goes into our indigenous industries, it's not a problem to spend a larger percentage of GDP.

Since all the money is going straight back into China.

This will provide a multiplier effect for our economy, creating jobs and increasing our technological base.

Very smart. Once her high valued defense industries matured, she can collect continuous dividends.

 

[Lankan Ranger]

I like to see $160 billion range, that's below 3% of her expected GDP. Many high tech areas need to catchup, and the Navy is still consider at her infancy as to what she needed.

 

[S10]

I think defence spending should be capped around 2% during peace time. Invest too much into the military and you risk getting a twisted political machine like the Americans have: Military-Industrial Complex.

 

[northeast]

I think defence spending should be capped around 2% during peace time. Invest too much into the military and you risk getting a twisted political machine like the Americans have: Military-Industrial Complex.

what's wrong with the military-industrial complex？
It's good.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

what's wrong with the military-industrial complex？
It's good.

it is objectively bad but comparatively good.

 

[marshall]

Since most of our defence spending goes into our indigenous industries, it's not a problem to spend a larger percentage of GDP.

Since all the money is going straight back into China.

This will provide a multiplier effect for our economy, creating jobs and increasing our technological base.

Military spending is the most inefficient use of government money besides purchases of US treasuries. If you want an economic multiplier, get rid of all advantages provided to foreign investments including tax holidays, lower tax rates, etc, and direct more bank funding to NON-FOREIGN owned or partnered private industry.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Military spending is the most inefficient use of government money besides purchases of US treasuries. If you want an economic multiplier, get rid of all advantages provided to foreign investments including tax holidays, lower tax rates, etc, and direct more bank funding to NON-FOREIGN owned or partnered private industry.

In a purely economic sense, yes.

However, having strong defence capabilities is worth a lot in itself, especially if you consider our history.

If you want an economic multiplier, get rid of all advantages provided to foreign investments including tax holidays, lower tax rates, etc, and direct more bank funding to NON-FOREIGN owned or partnered private industry.

I agree with this 100%.

 

[Fanling Monk]

(Reuters) - China is likely to unveil its military spending for 2012 on the weekend, flagging the direction that Beijing will take after President Barack Obama launched a new "pivot" to reinforce U.S. influence across Asia.


So the numbers that china will unveil this weekend will be closely monitored. It will also indicate China's official positions in terms of military directions.

 

[marshall]

In a purely economic sense, yes.

However, having strong defence capabilities is worth a lot in itself, especially if you consider our history.

The best use of the military budget would be for internal security. In other words, use $7.5 billion worth of the military budget and distribute this money as bi-weekly free welfare checks to the poor, uneducated areas of Xinjiang and Tibet. This would go to 5 million people, specifically the non-HAN Uighur and Tibetan minorities. The criteria would be that they were poor, low education and lived in contentious areas like southwestern Xinjiang. No money, aka "welfare" checks would go to monks, monasteries (they are already xenophobic and too far gone), wealthy or educated (they aren't the ones rioting).

This money would be like them getting almost a full year of salary (9400Y) doing nothing. It would buy China the time to develop in MORE relative peace until the day ALL Xighurs and Tibetans were rich and educated. Now that would be a good use of the military budget.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The best use of the military budget would be for internal security. In other words, use $7.5 billion worth of the military budget and distribute this money as bi-weekly free welfare checks to the poor, uneducated areas of Xinjiang and Tibet. This would go to 5 million people, specifically the non-HAN Uighur and Tibetan minorities. The criteria would be that they were poor, low education and lived in contentious areas like southwestern Xinjiang. No money, aka "welfare" checks would go to monks, monasteries (they are already xenophobic and too far gone), wealthy or educated (they aren't the ones rioting).

This money would be like them getting almost a full year of salary (9400Y) doing nothing. It would buy China the time to develop in MORE relative peace until the day ALL Xighurs and Tibetans were rich and educated. Now that would be a good use of the military budget.

It's a good idea.

It's hard to say for sure at this stage (too many variables) but the underlying idea is a good one.

 

[S10]

what's wrong with the military-industrial complex？
It's good.

The original term was Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. However, Eisenhower was forced to take out the congress part due to pressure.

This political entity lobbies the politicians to send a country into an endless cycle of war for profit, which they use to pay off more politicians. Eventually they hijack the foreign policy of a nation. Meanwhile, money that could be used elsewhere (social services, education, healthcare) gets sucked up into the war machine. When it grows out of control, it could slow stretch thin and bankrupt a nation, i.e. United States.

Chinese people often talk about 天下虽安, 忘战必危. I agree with that, but we also need to be mindful of the quote that preceded it, 国虽大，好战必亡.

《司马法》道“国虽大，好战必亡；天下虽安，忘战必危。