the general role that military spending plays in the U.S.

economy,
see the text following this footnote in U.P., and
footnotes 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of this chapter.


2. On the similar economic effects of civilian and military spending,
see for example, Paul Samuelson, Economics (Seventh Edition), New
York: McGraw, 1967. An excerpt (p. 767; emphasis in original):
Before leaving the problem of achieving and keeping full
employment, we should examine what would happen if the cold war
were to give way to relaxed international tension. If America could
cut down drastically on her defense expenditures, would that
confront her with a depression problem that has merely been
suppressed by reliance on armament production? The answer here
is much like that given in Chapter 18 to the problem of some future
acceleration of automation. If there is a political will, our mixed
economy can rather easily keep C + I + G [C = consumption, I =
investment, G = government spending] spending up to the level
needed for full employment without armament spending. There is
nothing special about G spending on jet bombers and
intercontinental missiles that leads to a larger multiplier support of
the economy than would other kinds of G expenditure.
John Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State, Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1967, pp. 230-231 (adding that, to have the same effect, the
civilian spending "would have to have somewhat of the same relation to
technology as the military spending it replaces").


3. Public funding of