Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In March 2025, in the thread "Re: OT, out", Umm asked the members: "Do you think it is because America is made up of magical soil that makes businesses based in America magically profitable?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (140) |
Author: AlphaWolf ✸✹🐝  😊 😞
Number: of 86273 
Subject: Re: Canada is seeking new friends
Date: 09/15/26 12:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 9
Is the US responsible for taking on 100% of the global security load for NATO countries? And if so, why?

This question makes me wonder if you’re aware of the fact that the U.S. does NOT take on 100% of the global security load for NATO countries.

NATO has two categories of spending.

Direct funding: For 2026, NATO's budget is roughly $6.06 billion USD. This covers NATO headquarters, joint military commands, satellite communication systems, and shared infrastructure. The U.S. contributes 14.9% of this budget.

Indirect funding (total defense spending). U.S. accounts for approximately 60% of total alliance defense spending. This is somewhat skewed because the U.S. total defense includes military installations and commitments around the world (such as in the Indo-Pacific), meaning not all of its defense budget is spent strictly on European or Euro-Atlantic defense.

Why does the U.S. spend so much money on NATO?

Because it benefits us!

It gives us global power projection, military operations burden sharing, economic security, intelligence sharing, need for fewer nuclear weapons floating around, AND, it’s a lot less expensive then if we went it alone.

Unfortunately, we do not have a president who is capable of thinking beyond transactional activity. His primary focus is on increasing his own net worth, even at the expense of our national security.

We are just seeing the beginning of the results of his behavior.

It will not end well.




Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to AlphaWolf here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 86,214 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (140) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community