stop posting garbage
China's Defense Spending Thread
- Thread starter antiterror13
- Start date
Based on their analysis the real Chinese GDP is twice that of the US…
At least the case if we consider real world impact (and not financial money number).
I mean looking at major item consumption and market size stats, China does seem to be closer to than 2x rather than 1.2x as the "official" gdp claims.
Basically gdp always overcounts (if you're trying to use gdp to measure economic impact) the importance of service sector, especially service sector that don't provide a signficant value add for the population.
I believe PPP is bullshit but this article breaks down why the 700 billion is wrong and gives a more accurate number.
Table 3. China’s Estimated 2024 Defense Spending
(Nuclear weapons, space, and intelligence programs not included)
Table 4. United States 2024 Comparable Defense Spending
(Nuclear weapons, space, and intelligence programs not included)
Table 3. China’s Estimated 2024 Defense Spending
(Nuclear weapons, space, and intelligence programs not included)
| Billion yuan | Billion U.S. dollars, Market Exchange Rate | Billion U.S. dollars, Purchasing Power Parity-adjusted | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Official defense budget | 1,670.0 | 232.0 | 321.0 |
| People’s Armed Police | 183.7 | 25.5 | 30.9 |
| Coast Guard | 19.3 | 2.7 | 3.2 |
| Defense construction | 5.2 | 0.7 | 2.2 |
| Military pensions and family support | 267.2 | 37.1 | 79.2 |
| Additional defense R&D | 250.5 | 34.8 | 34.8 |
| Total | 2,396 | 333 | 471 |
Table 4. United States 2024 Comparable Defense Spending
(Nuclear weapons, space, and intelligence programs not included)
| Billion U.S. dollars | |
|---|---|
| Total Department of Defense | 846 |
| Of which: Department of Defense (discretionary) | 825 |
| Of which: Department of Defense (mandatory) | 21 |
| Department of Veterans Affairs | 369 |
| Department of Homeland Security | 104 |
| Of which: Coast Guard | 14 |
| Total Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Coast Guard only | 1,229 |
| Total Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Department of Homeland Security | 1,319 |
Methodology below on why the Consumer PPP Index actually understates the Military PPP Index.
In other words, even if you used the Consumer PPP exchange rate, this is still an understatement of how much China gets for its spending.
Source
acquisitiontalk.com/2019/01/how-large-is-military-spending-in-the-us-and-china/
That is the macro view
---
Then if you do any sort of micro analysis and start looking at the individual prices of equipment or personnel costs, this also supports the idea that the Consumer PPP exchange rate understates the military buying power in China
An example from today would be this article, where small US drones are 3x more expensive and have worse tech than DJI drones. These are the types all over the battlefield in Ukraine. There's more reporting on other systems and their costs.
asia.nikkei.com/Business/Business-Spotlight/DJI-to-the-rescue-U.S.-police-want-China-drones-despite-Washington-clampdown
I was going to post this report that I found yesterday. To summarize everything you said in the table:
Equipment in China being 30% more expensive than the US equivalent sounds really wrong.
My guesstimate is that equivalent Chinese equipment is significantly cheaper. Call it:
Air Force: at least 20% cheaper in China
Navy: at least 50% cheaper in China
Army: at least 50% cheaper in China
So their Chinese military equipment PPP multiplier has to at least double, maybe even triple.
That impacts the O&M PPP multiplier, since a lot of this is purchases of spares/equipment/components.
---
Also, Chinese R&D costs being the same as the US sounds really wrong as well.
As the Air Force Acquisitions General said, China is 5x faster in weapons development and far more efficient. Source below.
twz.com/china-acquiring-new-weapons-five-times-faster-than-u-s-warns-top-official