The author’s key argument in this essay is that other sectors of the economy are as viable options for government spending as military spending in terms of job generation and compensation size. The author has compared analyzed the job generation from spending $1 billion on the military, to spending the same on tax cuts to increase personal consumption, on the education sector, health cares sector, mass transit sector and the weatherization and infrastructure repair sector. One of the most significant conclusions the author draws by this analysis (using the input-output model) is the fact that the same expenditure in each of these sectors other then the personal consumption increase results in more jobs being created.
Although only the education sector has a higher average wage rate the total compensation by which the author means average wage multiplied by the jobs created is greater then in military spending. Using this evidence the author basically points out that using jobs and wage levels to support military expenditure holds less viability then it would at face value. Although if we look at wage categories military spending does result in higher number of jobs in the above $64,000 category then any other sector(because of the high-tech nature of the jobs created) the education sector is close behind and maybe a better option because of its higher average wage.
These are just excerpts of essays please access the order form for custom essays, research papers, term papers, thesis, dissertations, book reports and case studies.