Which are named after rivers, wind currents, mountains, and regions, so is not like they have that many choices
The only constraint on increasing military spending would either be public aversion to tax hikes and/or Congressional aversion to more spending but the recent legislative history shows that both are rather weak
US social inequality has been fairly constant for decades
US interest/GDP ratios have also been pretty stable at 1-2% of GDP for decades
But I didn't say that the US is averse to spending increases and tax increases, what I meant by economic reality knocking in the door is that in order to increase military spending, they will need to decrease social spending or decrease current government spending. as a whole, which is unsustainable.
Social inequality is a much larger set than income inequality, including health care, access to housing, gender equality among several other types of inequality.
The US interest rate has averaged 5.42% from 1971 to 2022, with peaks reaching 20% and a low of 0.25% in 2008. Currently the rate is 3.75%-4% and rising margins at upcoming Fed meetings. The current rate is already twice what you claim the rate has been for decades, the graph shows a different history rate than you claim:
Not really: Government expenditure to GDP in the US is one of the lowest in the developed world
Basically all of these (access to healthcare, housing and nondiscrimination) are ways of proxying income and income inequality; however, in specifics, medicaid, housing assistance and civil rights protections (under the 1965 Civil Rights Act) have gotten stronger since the 1970s. Social inequality isn't straining public finances more than it already is (i.e., not a lot).
Not the Federal Funds Rate - the interest expense on debt to GDP. That has been at 1-2% for decades, even now with some of the most aggressive rate hikes in history.
Sure.
Truth. That's why the US is also in the last places in quality of life of developed countries. You don't have to believe me, just look at the CBO projections.
They are not. Income inequality is a measure of annual income distribution. Social inequality measures all metrics in terms of access to and guaranteed quality of life.
You mentioned the interest rate. If you mentioned about public debt interest expenses by GDP, it would be more understandable, and no, the average rate is 1.5-2% and they continue to increase after decreasing during the Obama administration.
Eh, nothing mentioned here is going to prevent the US from increasing military spending by 1.5% of GDP; interest expenses, social issues, etc - they all were similar or wose in the 1970s and 1980s where the US was able to sustain high levels of spending
It is reportedly on budget and on time (in terms of hitting deadlines) for now.