Exposing the Military Industrial Complex

Go to ground.news/ry... to stay fully informed. Subscribe through my link and get 40% the Vantage plan for unlimited access this month only
All of my data is available for free at ryanmcbeth.sub...
The widely held belief in the existence of a "military industrial complex" is false and has not been true since 1993. The concept is more of a cognitive impediment than a reality. Starting from Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address, I trace the evolution of defense and technology industries, highlighting their consolidation and the significant reduction in U.S. defense spending as a percentage of GDP since the Cold War. Then I contrast the profits of defense companies with those of big tech, pharmaceutical, and consumer product companies to demonstrate that defense contracting is not as lucrative or expansive as commonly believed.
The notion of a powerful military industrial complex is perpetuated by adversaries like Russia and China to justify their actions, I urge you to reconsider your perspectives based on the evidence provided.
For uncensored video, check out my substack at:
ryanmcbeth.sub...
Like my shirts? Get your own at:
www.bunkerbran...
Want a personalized greeting:
www.cameo.com/...
Watch all of my long form videos:
• Military Equipment, Ta...
Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth
Instagram:
@therealryanmcbeth
BlueSky
@ryanmcbeth
Reddit:
/r/ryanmcbeth
Join the conversation:
/ discord
Want to send me something?
Ryan McBeth Productions LLC
8705 Colesville Rd.
Suite 249
Silver Spring, MD 20910
USA

[@RyanMcBethProgramming]

Go to ground.news/ryanmcbeth to stay fully informed. Subscribe through my link and get 40% the Vantage plan for unlimited access this month only All of my data is available for free at ryanmcbeth.substack.com The widely held belief in the existence of a "military industrial complex" is false and has not been true since 1993. The concept is more of a cognitive impediment than a reality. Starting from Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address, I trace the evolution of defense and technology industries, highlighting their consolidation and the significant reduction in U.S. defense spending as a percentage of GDP since the Cold War. Then I contrast the profits of defense companies with those of big tech, pharmaceutical, and consumer product companies to demonstrate that defense contracting is not as lucrative or expansive as commonly believed. The notion of a powerful military industrial complex is perpetuated by adversaries like Russia and China to justify their actions, I urge you to reconsider your perspectives based on the evidence provided. For uncensored video, check out my substack at: ryanmcbeth.substack.com Like my shirts? Get your own at: www.bunkerbranding.com/pages/ryan-mcbeth Want a personalized greeting: www.cameo.com/ryanmcbeth Watch all of my long form videos: kzbin.info/aero/PLt670_P7pOGmLWZG78JlM-rG2ZrpPziOy Twitter: @ryanmcbeth Instagram: @therealryanmcbeth BlueSky @ryanmcbeth Reddit: /r/ryanmcbeth Join the conversation: discord.gg/pKuGDHZHrz Want to send me something? Ryan McBeth Productions LLC 8705 Colesville Rd. Suite 249 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA

[@rocko7711]

❤

[@douglaslucas2155]

According to Geoffrey Perret's biography of Eisenhower, Ike wanted to use the term "military-industrial-congressional complex" in his speech to acknowledge Congress' role in peacetime military expenditures. One current, relevant example: debate on the future viability of weapon systems like the A10 Warthog is conflated with the weapon’s importance to Congressional districts economically dependent on their continued manufacture.

[@dertythegrower]

Ground news is decent... had transparencyTube linked for years and they basically made a business out of that. Clever group that ruins the disney fantasy owned and comcast owned corpNews grifters on 'trending news' of most search engines of bias

[@paperburn]

While your basic correct with your ultimate findings I have been in the contracting machine from 1986. back then we had buckets of money hurled our way for any idea. in 92 there was that meeting but the real austerity did not show up until about 2000. 9/11 gave us a short reprieve but by 2010 the real cuts were creeping over the horizon. as a guess by 2016 everything got cut in half. Technology improvement was the other knife blade of doom. We went from 40 plus guys down to 10 . and of those ten 3 are information assurance tech. 2023 ,The cobbler's children have no shoes nowadays. the monster crumpled of its own accord to keep business alive. The first company I worked for had a 20 percent profit margin, today my budget has 3 percent. This is life. I am retiring this year, I was a great run

[@douglaslucas2155]

@@jeddej7884 Upset because Ryan exposes Dezinformatsiya?

[@YoBoyNeptune]

I thought "military industrial complex" was just shorthand for all the big defense manufacturers

[@dakotareid1566]

A lot of people think they have the most money and power and control the world

[@silentdrew7636]

Generally yes

[@fredmdbud]

it also involves the revolving door between defense industry and government leaders (e.g. former senior official -> defense executive -> government advisor, etc)

[@DalibanCohort]

No. It’s how arms dealers bribe congress to dictate policy for their own profit which unmistakably happens.

[@jasperzanovich2504]

It is.

[@Alex_Shishkin_1962]

Thanks, Ryan! I've lived in US for 32 years now. Have worked in manufacturing industry this entire time (mechanical engineer, designer of custom automation). Have never been directly employed by a defense contractor, but my employers had such contractors as customers often enough for me to get a decent grasp of how defense contractors function. I've been telling people pretty much what you've just said for at least about 10 years: the entire US 'military industrial complex' is dwarfed by other industries, which all lobby our politicians to a much greater extent than the defense contractors can afford to. You did profits comparison. I tried to do political contributions' comparison awhile ago, and came up with the same conclusion: our 'military industrial complex' 's political weight, as judged by its investment in political campaigns, is essentially a rounding error compared to our financial industry, to big pharma, etc. No matter what economic or political criteria one chooses, the conclusion is the same: the one you've just made.

[@Jaxck77]

2-4% of GDP is just that, tiny by comparison to the rest

[@Alex_Shishkin_1962]

@@Jaxck77 Precisely.

[@vatoencabronado]

The difference with defense spending is extremely inefficient in terms of economic and social benefit. That was the point of Eisenhower's speech. We're also talking about percentage of GDP, which is not the right metric, we should be talking about the federal budget, where defense spending is not a drop in the bucket, it's ~13-14%, which is money that could be spent much, much more efficiently, if the purpose of a federal government is the welfare of the people.

[@g1y3]

You forgot one thing, while fast foot industry is much bigger they aren't dependent on government contacts as much defence industry are completely relied on government & this is exploited by both politicians & Co-operates.

[@Alex_Shishkin_1962]

@@g1y3 I haven't forgotten anything. You are assuming two things that are not true: - Firstly, that US defense industry's sole source of income is US government. Not so. It is the largest source, true, but not the only one. - And secondly, that industries that do not sell to the government directly, are less dependent on the government. Again, not true. Our 'big pharma' is entirely dependent on government regulations, in its current form. Our social media companies are entirely dependent on government regulations, in their current monopolistic form. Our labor unions are entirely dependent on government regulations for their existence, in their current form. Each of the three I have just named is larger than our entire defense industry, and spends a lot more on shaping our politics. And none of these three has the same interests as the defense industry. And there are more similar groups in play in the US politics. Nobody is saying that defense industry is not trying to influence US politics at all. What Ryan is saying, and what I am saying, is that their influence is dwarfed by other groups, and because of that, they are incapable of single-handedly shaping US policies.

[@Dimetropteryx]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea that producing arms in times of war is somehow contrary to what the arms industry is supposed to do. It's like being angry at McDonalds for making hamburgers.

[@expfcwintergreenv2.02]

When was America not at war though?

[@BushPilot]

I believe the point you're missing is that they're produced even when we're NOT "in times of war". The general consensus is that it obviously makes sense to produce arms in/during times of war. Create adequate reserves, research, and build facilities capable of producing (to have on standby), when not.

[@jasperzanovich2504]

How long has the USA been at peace again?

[@ch-53esuperstallion76]

@@BushPiloti mean at time of peace stocks of weapons can still be depleted through military aid,training and other stuff

[@dertythegrower]

@@jasperzanovich2504 who had no wars and shook kim jung hand?

[@x--.]

Ryan, generally a lover you analysis but this video misunderstand power, grift and what people mean when they talk about the MIC. The complex isn't defined as an endless source of limitless money. Just look at that dinner you describe -- that was a strategy meeting about how the MIC was going to have to restructure. The politicians couldn't justify the limitless secret and unaccountable money hole but still wanted the winners of consolidation to know they'd be taken care of. So business needed to be restructured to allow the power dynamics to remain the same. Big corporations that are protected from true accountability (Hi Boeing!) with a guarantee that the everyone gets a piece of the smaller pie. That's the gist of it. Not unlimited pie but the power to choose who gets a piece of the pie, regardless of the size. This is the corruption I've seen personally in government. It's not the power to give unlimited money, it's the power to direct where the funds go. Net earnings are irrelevant because those executives aren't measured on running a good business, not really, because they are too big to fail -- so the *real* measure is leadership bonuses and will Congress continue to believe these companies are too big to fail. As long as investors have that faith, then the stock is secure. Your experience as a small player is _not_ an example contrary to the theory of the 'complex' but rather evidence of it, your company is not a big player and has to play by rules written for the big guys with more contract managers and bean counters than engineers. I can support Ukraine, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Japan, and the rest of the South China players (and do). I can think Obama totally biffed it on Ukraine (and do). I can think it is imperative that we have a strong military and the industrial capacity necessary to respond (and do). I can do all that _while_ still hating a system of unaccountable money grubbing corporate leaders who conspire with members of Congress in a system of completely legal quid pro quo.

[@TurgFergie]

Thanks for wetting what I would had to another degree otherwise. He presents a red herring bait and switch with non war time spending in comparison to peak spending during a nuclear threatened Cold War. The penchant for war unless you an inhuman war monger which I know many of my redneck neighbors are first hand, is not high in what’s supposed to be peace time. He’d have to also do a lot of leg work to not admit that the post 911 response wasn’t maniluated by someone with interest. We know Isreal had some of their own and connection to people in the bush White House but the decades long slog was the worst example of some other interest outside of the US being done without any miliatary mind with a goal or even a means to evaluated what a positive would even be. The military brass at the top are either some of the dumbest we’ve ever had, or they’re on the dole. He has to admit to some of this or else he’s proving his own compromised position is in fact what it is. To say the military industrial complex doesn’t exist is such a big lie that I can only take anything he says here from now on with a grain of salt. There might be truth to much of what he says but if it’s just another psych-op then he’s doing exactly the thing he rails on against form another vantage point.

[@CVE_00001]

I know right.... In 2020 the top 5 defense contractors paid out almost 300 mil to their CEOs, I love this guy's videos but most of the points made here are irrelevant and he's missed the mark by a wide margin

[@jjj8317]

​@CVE_00001 have you seen the size of the US economy? No? OK, take all of Europe, add Russia, and Japan and it is still bigger

[@CVE_00001]

@@jjj8317 Was this comment supposed to have any relevance to what I just stated? If so, I would appreciate a more thorough explanation so as to better understand.

[@Jahgwa01]

Boeing engineer here in the defense side of things. First off, Boeing has never done anything wrong and I love my job (pls don't kill me). Second off, I can guarantee there's no money anywhere in this business. Our commercial counterpart constantly has new equipment and machines, but unless we can get a specific piece of machinery justified in a specific contract and convince the government that our old machine is no longer viable, improvements to our production line simply never happen. There's just no budget for it.

[@angmori172]

Blink twice if you think they're about to Clinton you

[@gibbsm]

working at Boeing IDS was shit, it's like working in the 70s or 80s, at least when I was there.

[@markbrisec3972]

You should switch companies... I've seen Lockheed's F-35 factory. Nature of my business took me to Raytheon's SM missile factory line.. They're both sci-fi, high tech with the latest goodies.. Also the workers are more than compensated... Hate to tell you but Boeing's defense department is a dying breed, especially since the Pegasus debacle. And don't get me started on the X-32 program..

[@billdeibner7105]

There is also a group looking for the next enemy. “We need more ships to fight xyz”, “we need more army to fight xyz and abc at the same time”, “our enemies have developed qrs and we have no defense, we’re all going to die” it goes on and on.

[@LackofFaithify]

You may be confusing being owned by groups like Vanguard and Blackrock with having a company that has a motivation other than profit and nothing else. Easy mistake to make. That or the worlds largest spender in all things military means something other than it's literal meaning. There's money, the fact that you don't get to interact with it is not of any consequence.

[@Forheavenssake1ify]

His warning- "We must never let the weight of this combination (special interest groups, the media, and political parties) endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted." Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[@MarcosElMalo2]

From what I can tell, when people complain about the MIC, they’re complaining about lobbying. We should call it the Congressional Industrial Lobbying Complex, and we should note that defense contractors make up a very small part of it and face more scrutiny than other lobbying interests. Sometimes they complain about the military being overcharged for tools and parts from defense contractors. But they don’t educate themselves about government specifications and standards that push prices up. I do think there is a valid case for better and more social spending, but not at the expense of defense spending.

[@fredmdbud]

I would include the defense conglomerates as special interest groups, too, which kind of blow's Ryan's argument out of the water

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

​@@fredmdbud Conglomerates exist because purchases and mergers are the only way to survive.

[@PeterPanMan]

@@fredmdbud Ryan covers the conglomerates in some detail in the video (@12:00 to @13:25, et al). Your comment makes me wonder if you actually watched the video at all. Ryan may not walk on water but he's far from being blown out of it.

[@TS-bj8my]

@@MarcosElMalo2 20% of the US military budget would cover most of the social spending that your talking about and I'm all for it!

[@grumpyed58]

I've been a defense engineer since 1986. Watching my coworkers adapt to the death of the industrial defense complex was painful. Plus the consolidation of metal benders sucks. Competition went bye bye

[@orlock20]

It's not dying. It's getting more efficient with workers while the cost of the product increases. For instance, the modern U.S. tank costs $5 million.

[@Rocketsong]

Yeah, every time there was a merger or buyout you knew you were in for at least a 20% RIF.

[@dukecraig2402]

​@@orlock20 Just because the cost of a tank increases doesn't mean the profit from making them increases, that would only be true if they were making the same tank they did in the 50's, instead they make tanks packed with so much tech it greatly increases their manufacturing costs, even something like the M1 Abrams isn't the same tank they made 40 years ago, they've had so much more electronics, which they have to buy from someone, incorporated into them, even the armor itself costs a lot more than the original M1's armor did because of all the upgrades needed to defeat the latest anti armor weapons, the original M1 is a virtual dinosaur compared to the latest model and although it costs a tremendous amount more (adjusting for inflation of course) you can bet the profit on each one is less than back when it was just the M1 before all the upgrades that've been piled on over the years resulting in the M1 SEP V3.

[@RLDenham]

The consolidation of the defense manufacturers is the personification of industrial complex the big eat the small so the big have more control.

[@orlock20]

@@dukecraig2402 It's been proven that a $5 million tank can be taken out with a $10,000 weapon.

[@shamgar7741]

As a person who works in this world, you nailed it. Case in point…no government employee can accept a lunch or a dinner in excess of $15. I can’t tell you the number of times I had to put out a contribution cup when we did working lunches with our military counterparts.

[@gargoyle7863]

These tight rules are for a reason.

[@TCW838]

The $15.00 thing applies to government employees as well (speaking at least for state governments, as a retired government employee). That's not really a good measurement although I agree with your general point and Ryan's presentation. Those on the outside often fall 'victim' to easy talking points.

[@Omenowl]

It is 20 dollars per occasion per individual from a single source and 50 dollars total per year per individual from a single source. I never saw a problem with it and have had to turn down expensive meals several times.

[@ShiroZ31]

Weird how about anyone above Col can get a sweet gig with a defense contractor about five minutes after retirement. Where they can immediately put their rolodex to work influencing decisions.

[@Rocketsong]

We had this stupid rule that if I went on a business trip with one of our USAF guys, he had to get the rental car and drive. Because somehow if I (as a contractor) drove that was considered some sort of nefarious contribution. No matter that the business expenses all came out of the same pot of money.

[@Klausewits]

Ryan, you’re looking at the problem incorrectly. U.S. military spending/defense budget for 2022 was $876.94B, a 8.77% increase from 2021. The defense spending for the last 10 years has been $6,446.63 Billion Dollars. It’s estimated that total defense spending since 1960 to be $18.64 Trillion (current) U.S. dollars. The profit for defense companies DOESN’T matter (in regards to the MIC), it’s the amount of debt the U.S. incurs through endless wars - and who is all that DEBT owed to? Reframe the title as Ike’s original, Military Industrial CONGRESSIONAL Complex to get a more accurate picture how they all work together to fill the elitist, egalitarian, globalist banker’s pockets.

[@logman3707]

I read online the account of a former military officer who went into defense, and how the same people who thanked him for his service suddenly got mad at him for making the same weapons he used.

[@markgoggin2014]

The Davy Crockett was a platoon level atomic bazooka

[@Bugga451]

Cold War arms development is a kind of wild on the scale of pre and post WW1 small arms development.

[@k53847]

@@Bugga451 Davy Crocket was not that crazy. Project Pluto, now that was something... A mach 3 nuclear powered cruise missile that would fly for weeks at treetop level using it's sonic boom to kill commies after it used its sixteen 10-megaton nukes on major targets.

[@markgoggin2014]

@@Bugga451 if you fired it to the max distance and then hopped in the jeep and gunned it, you still would be in the radius of the weapon

[@glorioustigereye]

I remember Perun had this as a segment of his video I'm glad to get more clarity on it. Perun also mentioned how a lot of knowledge also could have been lost in the mergers.

[@Rocketsong]

Every merger usually means a 20-30% RIF. The folks who get laid off are often the guys who know a lot, but are not good at brown-nosing the new management. So yeah, I saw a lot of talent go out the door at each merger. Same with BRAC. We lost tons and tons of talent at the Air Force Research Lab because most of those folks were contractors (scientists, engineers) who had Zero interest in relocating to Ohio.

[@arthurmoore9488]

The other problem with mergers/acquisitions is it can be like getting a transplant from someone who died of a disease. Looking at Boeing here.

[@ArtCoDroneAndEntertianment]

I work for Trelleborg which make components for Airbus, Space X, Blue Origin, Raytheon and other defense companies. They have factories all over the world. The company began as a rubber company in Sweden in 1915.

[@Whatshisname346]

You’re so right on this subject. I’m on the left of the political spectrum (far left by US standards) and this term has been misused by people on the left and right for decades to pretend they have something informed to say about capitalism and geopolitics. It’s utter nonsense. Consolidation, strict product specifications and tendering processes mean that it is a very tough business to be in …… unless you’re an autocracy. We get this spiel from vatniks and Tankies about how Russian and Chinese defence contractors are state owned so therefore the profits go to pay for little Ivan to have school books or whatever. The fact is that these companies have very complex ownership arrangements meaning that oligarchs and managers usually skim the lions share of the profits off the top and as they’re state owned in an autocratic state financial reporting is minimal. This is in no way an unequivocal defence of privately own defence contractors; they make it very difficult to add flexibility to production when there is a war but they also take on most of the R&D risk which would otherwise be seen as waste in a government budget. But the very concept of the military industrial complex has been dead in ‘the west’ for decades. The idea that your politicians are salivating at the idea of spending your taxes on unnecessary weapons is make believe at best or Russian/Chinese/Tankie propaganda at worst.

[@MayoFinch]

If you look at the difference between open market contractors and defense contractors, you will see that the United States pay structure is completely unlike normal conventional contractors in the sense that they have no financing issues as all contracts pay upfront and therefore things like financing expenses via cash flow expenses or other typical business expenses. The upfront financing as the customer (military) is unparalleled in the private sector.

[@arthurmoore9488]

​@@MayoFinch Real life example. Division at a private sector company needs 50 software licenses to fulfill a contract. Management submits it to accounting. When approved they use their credit card on the software company's website to purchase them. They *should* also log it in a software inventory, and note the recurring expense, but that's not required. End. DOD Contractor needs those same licenses. Government says they can only be purchased from companies on a list, and those companies don't publish their markup. Step 1, obtain said list. Step 2, contact multiple companies to obtain bids. Step 3 fill out more paperwork for the government, taking multiple meetings and weeks of time. Step 3a Try to get the government to pay for it despite it being a fixed price contract, since they agreed to pay for some maintenance items. Step 4 purchase from the selected reseller at whatever markup they end up charging. Step 5, load those software licenses into the software company's website so they can be managed and tracked appropriately. Here's the kicker. The software company in question also sells directly to the government! All of this BS was in the name of reducing "waste, fraud, and abuse." Until a regular contractor is allowed to operate as a regular company on performing internal operations, I would expect special contract provisions and extra money to make up for the utterly painful experience. That's the other reason many DOD contractor employees are paid so well. Because the amount of BS we're dealing with is "TPS report" levels.

[@lobsteroids]

So you have understood nothing. And your "im far left" basically means nothing because you are from the US and with what you said you showed that you also wouldnt be left everywhere else.

[@georgewilkie3580]

RYAN!! As an old US Army SSG E-6 (505th PIR 82nd Airborne Division) And having served in the Vietnam War (Phu Bai and Quang Tri), I sincerely appreciate your exposing the old, "Military Industrial Complex" Bogeyman Myth! I am in total agreement with All you've said. Additionally, I am so damn impressed with you report containing all the necessary facts, figures, and dates. You perform a much needed job in informing and exposing some of these decades old myths that haunt Americans from time to time. Once again, Mucho Gracias, Amigo!

[@starfleethastanks]

Wait, no! I was going to use the MIC to put myself in power! My scheme is ruined! NOOOOOOOOO!

[@peekaboopeekaboo1165]

War is a racket ! < Gen. Smedley Butler

[@hoihoi726]

You dont get it, the MIC IS the power. You dont use it, it uses you.

[@thegreatrainman2336]

You are late that's what the US government did to project power leverage and influence. A little late to the show.

[@captainuseless2120]

@@hoihoi726It really isn’t though, as this video shows. MIC doesn’t even rake in a fraction of the profits of every other industry. So to say they somehow have a unique level of control over politics is just plain silly. If it’s all about bribes, everyone else is paying way more.

[@hoihoi726]

@@captainuseless2120 The MIC allmost exclusively does business with the government, who need them to keep their army running as intended. They have political power in a way other industries just dont have. Taking defense revenue as a percentage of the total economy is a non sequitur. Try looking at defense spending as a percentage of government budget. If you have a lot of money to throw around, deals can usually be made above board. Outright bribes at such high level of government are very uncommon, since you need to pay allready very wealthy people off to do very illegal things. Covertly

[@haldon12]

Me seeing the title: Oh, come on! Me seeing the spreadsheet: And this is why you watch the video. If you don't like McBeth's conclusions, look at the math. Fact-based conclusions won't always win, but they're a lot more stable to build your opinions on.

[@wessexdruid7598]

See my comment above, if it lasts with the link... "According to Ryan's spreadsheet, total revenue (not profit) for the defense sector in 2023 is just under $296 Bn. However, the Biden administration is on record as having requested $852 Bn for the DoD in FY2024. However, from the DoD's own figures, they have distributed a budget of $2.08 Trillion, for FY2024, including what are called 'obligations', essentially promises to spend with contractors. _link to us government data_ Granted that's 2023 v 2024, but that's still A LOT of money that's not been accounted for in Ryan's spreadsheet?

[@tuckeraar]

​@@wessexdruid7598 you're confusing military spending with the military industrial complex. Spending yoy may be higher as a number, but compared to the rest of the economy it's getting smaller. A large chunk of that is soldiers pay and benefits. Another large portion is just the up keeping of what they already own. Also funds go to contractors, such as people just driving trucks for the military and preparing meals for soldiers. We wouldn't consider those part of the military industrial complex.

[@sentenced2sail]

@@wessexdruid7598 Well, the military needs crap loads of fuel, food, they need to rent bases,fly people around the world, and all those dollars go to contractors who are not per-say part of the Military Industrial Complex, but they still charge crap-loads of money for their supplies and labor.

[@wessexdruid7598]

@@sentenced2sail Are you sure that they're NOT part of that $2 Trillion funding cycle? Surely that is the whole MICC, living off 'the crap loads of money'.

[@gabu8065]

Sameeee😅

[@UkraineJames2000]

How dare you inject nuance into a complex subject. 😤

[@bdinaz]

It is more complex than what you see here. Best example was right after 9/11 half the congress people started showing up with boxes of stuff they said needed to be purchased immediately. It just so happened this gear was usually produced in their district by campaign donors. At first whole batches of this crap got purchased and shipped in to both Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of it was of dubious value. Then the formed a team to review this stuff to see if anyone even wanted it, and then shortly after that if it even had half a chance at functioning. In the meantime this gear was sent in to theater and was often just stuffed into Connexs to get it out if the way. We were always impressed when corporate guys back home trumpeted the gear they built, funded, and shipped over and was supposedly winning the war for us. Only we knew it filled multiple connexes never to be used. Always wondered what became of half of it as we left MANY connexes in place when we left.

[@MeeesterBond17]

It'll have been listed by the mainstream media as "war-winning American equipment foolishly left behind for the Taliban". 😊

[@jtremblay100]

Eisenhower would have updated his speech if he gave it today to talk about lobbiests seeking power and influence. He would have talked about wall street, the pharmaceutical companies, the gun lobby, the oil companies…….

[@simonjohnston9488]

You smother him with a virtue he doesn't need nor deserve. Given who the man actually was, I award this attempt at mind and soul reading a 1 out of 10.

[@jtremblay100]

@@simonjohnston9488 I’m not smothering him with any virtue. I’m saying times have changed yet in some ways have stayed the same.

[@dwightchaos9449]

Gun lobby gotta be one of smallest… the general people just don’t want to give up their guns. They would get a fight without a lobby.

[@hoihoi726]

Bruh that's what he was talking about the whole time. The concept of the military industrial complex is basically nothing more than the military lobby.

[@ludvig3242]

Lobbying is just another mindless buzzword. People think it happens WAY more than it actually does, and often fail to even give examples

[@silentdrew7636]

I think a lot of people forget that the defense industry is one of the few left where product quality and employee pay still matter.

[@fredmdbud]

cough, cough, Boeing, cough, cough ...

[@Archone666]

cough, cough, F-35, cough, cough...

[@XTRaptor]

@@Archone666that’s a great point the most advanced fighter jet that is so good it has never lost a trial by any foreign country even when Justin Trudeau declared that Canada would not buy it, cancelled the original order, and tried his best to get literally anything other than the F-35 in order to save himself the embarrassment. It STILL WON with the main reason for buying it was it’s cheaper than the fighter jet designed from the beginning to be cheap(Saab Gripen).

[@rbannister4380]

That's the problem. Canada doesn't need the F35. It is too much of a plane for their needs. What they need is a modern day version of the F18. Which with limited aircraft manufacturers, are not being built.

[@GARDENER42]

@@XTRaptor F-35 is NOT cheaper than Gripen & Canada went for F-35 because in the end, it's a far more advanced & capable aircraft.

[@Flegetanis]

You really come across, in this video, like my old joke: "There is no Illuminati; I should know -- I'm a member!"

[@joshpotter9261]

The guy is an asset. By that I mean that his glow is showing. The guy is CIA adjacent. There is a Military Industrial Complex and anyone that says otherwise is gaslighting you.

[@harvyt257]

Still like the guy though but yeah. That kind of says it all.

[@viysnjor4811]

So basically you believe in the MIC and no amount of evidence will change your mind? Good to know. Can't reason someone out a position they didnt reason themself into to begin with.

[@kevincronk7981]

One of the big issues people have with the defense contractors is how intertwined with government they are. A ton of senators and congresspeople have large investments in defense contractors, and then those same people choose how much those defense contractors get paid. Seems like a bit of a conflict of interest if you ask me.

[@jonthinks6238]

That can only be corrected by the politicians, unfortunately. The businesses are trying to make profits, and there is no crime there.

[@dukecraig2402]

They're not stupid enough to invest money in them, they take their lobbying money and their elections get funded by them which is far more profitable than investing in their stock. If you think doing that is such a home run then go ahead, invest your own money in defense contractors, that's not how politicians get rich off of them, it's the lobbying money and the millions in contributions.

[@kevincronk7981]

@dukecraig2402 their investments are public info. You can see for yourself exactly what they invest in, and yes many of them do invest in defense companies. How they make money off of it is that they trade the stocks based on info they have (i.e. if they just decided they're gonna give Northrup Grumman a big contract) but the public doesn't yet. This is a wider problem of insider trading in congress, but it's especially bad for companies like defense contractors when they literally decide how much money the companies make and when

[@ryelor123]

Yeah, but they also have investments in other companies as well.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

There is no conflict. They have been bought and paid for, and in return they make decisions to please their owners... I mean "donors".

[@andrewelsbury7269]

I work with companies in the defence sector and I can tell you if they relied on just military contracts to keep afloat, they would be closing their doors in weeks. Many of the companies I work with specialise in certain fabrication techniques which are useful for some production of military hardware but for the most part they manufacture: car parts, medical items, mining equipment and bathroom heaters.

[@PoeEkaf]

I love this quote from that speech. "Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

[@BobTheBuilderGuy]

Ryan's approach to numbers is great. It's what everyone should do when making claims. I absolutely loved this video because it does not rely on shadowy figures or organisations that are never properly explained. Instead, it sets out a simple premise, breaks it down, explains the point, and gives away the statistics free with the video. Ryan, if you read this comment, I know your American, but is it possible to also do some videos on the British military too. truly appreciate all your content.

[@jonthinks6238]

He showed you how to do it. Use your time wisely, grasshopper.

[@buhmand]

Unfortunately, he did not read the statistics correctly. The important number you should focus on is not the "Net Earnings" but the difference between "Revenue" and "Net Earnings": ~300B - ~14B is 286B. That 286B had to go somewhere.

[@BobTheBuilderGuy]

@@buhmand wouldnt that just be the cost to make the products. if its not net earnings or revenue then what "earnings" would you classify that as?

[@buhmand]

@@BobTheBuilderGuy That difference between "Net earnings" and "revenue" can be classified as "expenses". One expance is paying for lobiests. Other expenses go towords unjustifiable overpriced materials. And if only 1% of this money is lost somehow, the loss would be in the billions. The bottom line is that your expanses are someone's revenue.

[@h8GW]

All I got from this video is that we aren't taxing Apple enough.

[@hackmind]

He miss that actually Microsoft and Amazon do make business with the military and part of the revenue comes from it. Focusing only on Lockheed Martin and Boeing while excluding those is not misleading but a miss

[@wessexdruid7598]

@@hackmind It's a DIP, in his terminology.

[@ludvig3242]

Why? How much are they allowed to make? A huge part of the revenue gets reinvested right back into the company anyway

[@RAS_Squints]

People who say defense industries waste tax payer money have no idea what TINA Compliance or JSA is. The one thing that makes all Defense Contractors shit their pants is getting a CAR from the government

[@Adammanntium]

I believe it references more to the butter or cannons problem. All money that goes to military production is wasted money. Not because "peace" but simply because tanks can't generate income to the national economy (unless they conquer Something of course) But the money used to buy that tank was taken from the economy, as a result the more money you take from the civil economy to make military equipment the weaker the economy becomes.

[@JohnHill-qo3hb]

@@Adammanntium So what happens to the money paid to those who work for a defense company, what happens to the money that defense companies pay to other companies for goods required for the defense company to manufacture what they have been contracted to make, do they just bank it and not spend any? The monies paid for the production of defense material trickles back into the economy.

[@ShiroZ31]

Lol that's cute

[@dukecraig2402]

​@@JohnHill-qo3hb Yep, people said the same nonsense about the Apollo program, "Look at all that money they're spending on the moon", it's like I'm always explaining to people, not one red cent was spent on the moon, it was all spent on the contractors that built the components of the Saturn V, which employed over 400,000 people in good paying job's, those people lived in communities that depended on those pay checks, stores, tire shops, dentists, automobile dealerships even the newspaper boy and many more all got that money from the people who worked at the contractors that made the components for the Saturn V, no money went to the moon, it all stayed down here.

[@sentenced2sail]

But how about the 2000 dollar hammer? Urban legend?

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

When Ike gave that speech in 1961, defense procurement spending was 4% of GDP. When Reagan left office in 1989, it was 3%. Today, it's 1%. For those not aware, defense contract profits are limited to 10.5%. See the C-5B history.

[@kemarisite]

The business majors had TI-85s. Engineers had Hewlett Packard calculators when i was in school. Desert Storm also saw bombers with 500 pound laser guided bombs dropping them on individual tanks, "tank plinking". I'm amused you mentioned the Last Supper in 1993, because Perun talked about that in a presentation just a month or so ago. Honestly, I've long thought that the "military-industrial complex" concept bore a strong resemblance to the "merchants of death" trope that came out of a Senate committee in the 30s and helped keep American out of WW2 for a while.

[@ELYELYELroy]

I would be interested in seeing a comparison of money spent on lobbying between the industries like you did with profit. (not sure if you did and i missed it)

[@Michael_Biggs_]

They do not have to spend as much as you think. The politicians know who has employees in their districts and states.

[@Farsight453]

Yeah, lobbying is pretty cheap. You'd be surprised how little it costs to buy a vote. Plus, it's public information.

[@MarcosElMalo2]

@@Farsight453 Lobbying is a matter of public record. Super PACs are not.

[@Farsight453]

@MarcosElMalo2 You are confusing super pacs with dark money. Plus, even with dark money, it is relatively easy to figure out both who gave the money and how much. People just don't care.

[@keyworksurfer]

i wouldn't mind seeing this either but... i hope you don't think proctor and gamble or pfizer or whoever aren't spending half of all their money on lobbying against safety regs...

[@littlejimmy7402]

Ryan, I respect you immensely. I was US Army FA MLRS 86-89 and again 2004-7. I was on both sides of the base closures. To this day I can't understand how all of the civilian contractors cost less than the Army personnel that were replaced in Dining facilities and Security. Do Privates earn more than civilian full-timers now? Kind of hard to believe. My issue with the MIC is the dumb spending that gets rubber stamped. Example, My unit deployed to Afghanistan in 2006, the budgetary floodgates were pinned open. I don't mind really, I might be a little bitter though. While We were preparing for deployment We were ordered to this building at this time, everyone who didn't need corrective lenses received 2 pairs of Oakley sun glasses. They were for sure an older design, they were in the stinky ACU colors. But they were considered consumable, I don't know what the line item cost was but I can only put Oakley prices in there. We received additional ballistic eye wear. All sorts of stuff, it felt kind of hunger games like all the gear We were receiving in a short window of time before deployment. I don't mind the spend, being valued feels great. It felt like there was a culture of death by a thousand cuts going on. It was just so different from My time in the 80's, and My Dad's time at the tail end of WWII.

[@ryelor123]

I think the use of civilian contractors is common because its much easier to hire a contractors to do something than to do it in-house. Also, the cooks can now do other things that are more important. So it may cost more to hire contractors but it may also allow the military to be more effective with the same number of soldiers.

[@johnhaller5851]

To pile on, with an all volunteer force which isn't meeting its recruitment quotas, can the military afford to allocate privates to cooking food or working security? No, they aren't financially cheaper, but why spend the time getting someone into great physical shape, learn to be part of a deployable force, and then use that training to cook meals? It's better to use civilians who can't pass the military entrance criteria for those jobs.

[@lqr824]

> Do Privates earn more than civilian full-timers now? I think they probably do. Even privates qualify for a good pension at an extremely young age, and have good health care for life. Other benefits are available that can be frankly pretty expensive. Privates also need housing, transport, basic training, MOS training, etc. etc. The rate per hour may be 5x what the private's pay works out to per hour, and still be a lot cheaper.

[@KoRntech]

7:57 hey now you forgot we lauched a minuteman out the backend of a C-5 Galaxy... because we could.

[@arthurmoore9488]

I personally love the palatalized launchers and wonder what happened to those. I think that's what you're referring to, but there may have been a version for other missiles as well. The US is all about, "How can we turn our logistics aircraft into munitions delivery aircraft," and I'm here for it!

[@billmassello3729]

Everybody needs toothpaste…of course it makes more money than Boeing …

[@danzigvssartre]

What? You're not getting the latest update on Raytheon's new rocket launcher to go with your new lounge room furniture???

[@williamkealey2636]

"Lets look at the profits of big tech companies" > Lists Tech Companies that are also Military Contractors.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

Excellent point. Apparently a large fraction of Amazon's AWS business is with the military, whi they provide with Cloud Computing! From The Register (Apr 2022): *$10b National Security Agency contract re-awarded to AWS* _Microsoft won, Amazon complained. Amazon won, Microsoft complained. Amazon won... again_

[@GonzoTehGreat]

"Pentagon shares nine billion cloudy dollars between AWS, Google, Microsoft, Oracle" - from The Register (Dec 2022)

[@vexadis3148]

That’s not where their profits are coming from buddy

[@madeofgrease9220]

Most of the money that was made was from citizens not military.

[@williamkealey2636]

@@madeofgrease9220 You can say that about most contractors.

[@moxie_ST]

Truth (light) and hard facts are the best disinfection in this era of half truth and lies. 🍻 Love you man ❤

[@MayoFinch]

There are some pretty massive flaws in his analysis. If you are curious, compare military expenditures as a percentage of the Federal budget and not national GDP. Also, the Federal budget in the time of Eisenhower was in the billions and now it is in the trillions. Looking at corporate profits should not diminish total corporate expenditures. For instance, if you compare research and development expenses consistently decreasing while shareholder dividends increasing, you might see the overall health of major defense contractors as supremely fiscally healthy.

[@moxie_ST]

@@MayoFinch that was/is quite specific and detail example of his mistake, as if you are looking at his videos just to find mistakes and point them out. What was the video you find those mistakes ? And, is earth flat or sphere?

[@MayoFinch]

@@moxie_ST Lol, I'm just an average dude. Noticed he said some stuff that wasn't correct. That's all.

[@moxie_ST]

@@MayoFinch we all make mistakes dot we? And did those few mistakes he made make him wrong in general? What is your mistake ?

[@CVE_00001]

If this were the case, why are defense contractors spending hundreds of millions of dollars every election cycle to hire multiple lobbyists per member of congress? You're good at misdirection, but let me ask you, is there any chance the company profits are perceived poorly due to the fact that some of the execs are paid 8-9 figures? As im sure you know, in 2020 the top 5 defense contractors paid out nearly 300 million to their CEOs.

[@driveswitharage]

This guy is either an influencer on the MIC's or intelligence community payroll, or is an unwitting jingoist all too happy to carry water for the machinery of the administrative state

[@billcasso5428]

No government contractor should be allowed to donate to any PAC or political campaign. No government official should be allowed to work for a defense contractor after retirement. Whatever you want to call this system it has got to stop. The sales team that I was on would play the game of hiring the people that we were trying to sell our system to after their retirement just to get our foot in the door. We demonstrated our system to the AF only have them attempt to copy our invention to build it in house, they failed and then bought our system.

[@viysnjor4811]

So to stop the government you want to give the government the power to ignore individuals' constitutional rights? Galaxy brain idea.

[@hrnfw4818]

This should probably apply to any company that has a majority of its revenue stream from government programs ( big Hospital , big Health insurance , big Pharma ) where 17% of GDP is spent mostly in government paid or mandated programs . Focusing on the MIC is frankly ignoring the real fox in the chicken house. Having tax free 501c3s that exist for the purpose of “public education” that is effectively political advertisement and lobbying that is being paid for with pre tax dollars is shameful and should also be eliminated ( with prejudice ) . Which political party is calling for that ? No wait neither ? Oh .

[@thepeopleunderthetrees6318]

​@@viysnjor4811there has to be a line.

[@charlesroberts9675]

Auditors say the Pentagon cannot account for $220 billion worth of government-owned gear provided to military contractors-and the actual total is likely much higher.

[@Padraic54]

This is the sort of stuff I'm wondering about. The video was really interesting, but I'd also like an explanation of the money that has gone missing involving military contracts.

[@mannyhernandez6507]

That is bull shit. Every contract with the USG and military contractors begins with a rental agreement for use in which the contractor submits an inventory the USG has for the test vehicles the contractor wants to rent the USG for use even if contractors manufacture it. This is another lie.

[@charlesroberts9675]

@@mannyhernandez6507 The Pentagon has failed every audit for the past 5 years. Your Comment is ill-informed, do better research.

[@CoffeeAndPaul]

​@@mannyhernandez6507, fair enough, & I'm a Federal civil servant who, though I don't work at the Pentagon, I have government finance & I understand how to read a Federal Agency ledger & trial balance. The Pentagon has the most screwed-up of those 2 materials. Money DOES go missing, maybe not in Acquisition, maybe not in Operations, maybe not in R&D, but money is still going missing. We need to fix the Pentagon accounting & reporting practices so that ALL of the missing money is attributed to Secret, TS or whatever programs because I've worked in several bureaucracies & I've seen a lot of thieving behaviors or at least attempts to thieve from Federal budgets.

[@kuyre2239]

this guy is a defence contractor, right? reason this guy can afford $100,000 tesla.

[@XinaCCPFreeTibet]

You missed: Politicians are infallible Defense manufacturers are not crony capitalists and will never play dirty to make a buck. There are no $1000 air craft warning stickers or $600/hr software consultants.

[@Potatoarmy12]

Thank god we have people like you who actually do the work and research the topic they are talking about.

[@beyondEV]

While the analysis in terms of ME as % of gdp is mostly correct (SIPRI has higher numbers, probably included more than just the big contractors), there are some things left out. In Terms of per capita ME, the US is spending a lot more. Same btw. is true for China. MIC influence has taken a massive hit at the end of the cold war. MIC still exists, if not, the western world would be in serious trouble. The real question is, did the MIC had influence on the US doing stupid things like making up a casus belli and invade iraq. or was that just a stupid politician. or was it influenced by the military needing some real combat experience. Think it's near impossible to take apart, where MIC or the military itself are the drivers for exaggerating threats in order to get their hands on taxpayer dollars. at some point those weapons are going to be out of date unless you use them. right now, the serve a just cause. Personally, i think, someone would find another way to expend the stockpiles, one likely not as just.

[@dukecraig2402]

​@@beyondEV The myth that there were WMD's in Iraq came from Sadam Hussain himself, he may not have had the greatest military in the world but one thing he had that was very good at what they did was his intelligence arm, he had them launch a disinformation campaign that the entire western intelligence community fell for, and the reason he did it was because after he got kicked out of Kuwait he looked like a loser and wanted some prestige back, he wanted it to look like he'd gotten over on the UN inspectors after Desert Storm and managed to hide all his WMD's, he wanted Israel and everyone else to think he was still a player in the region, a force to be reckoned with, well he convinced all the western intelligence agencies that he had them alright, it just didn't lead to the outcome he thought it would. And as far as the invasion and him being removed from power consider this, Marie Colvin, the woman war reporter that lost an eye covering hostilities in Sri Lanka and wore an eye patch the last 10 years or so of her life used to defend the invasion of Iraq to her last breath, even after everything went sideways from them not finding WMD's she'd still defend Iraq being invaded at dinner parties and anywhere else people would start ragging on it, and that's because she covered Sadam's atrocities, the mass graves that were dug up with 600+ people in them, his torture chambers and especially the nonsense his son's were into like having teenage girls drug right out of schools and taken to their private homes that had their own torture chambers and "sex rooms" in them who were never seen alive again, as m7ch as she was anti war she 100% backed the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Sadam and his son's, because she saw the nightmares caused by them first hand.

[@domerame5913]

​@@beyondEV No way you just blamed Iraq on MIC lmao. It wasn't just a politician either. There was majority support for a war even before a media campaign to drum up support was started. I know it feels better in the stomach to blame oil or one politician or shadow men, but that's pure denial of reality. Democracy involves taking responsibility for the state of your politics, no exceptions, especially not imaginary ones. It's not a coincidence that conspiracy theories started going wild after Iraq, reality became a little harder to look in the eyes, so people retreat into fantasy.

[@satorarepo744]

My father was a tactical nuclear pilot in 1960-61. US Navy, A-1 Skyraider (thats a single engine, single pilot, propeller driven airframe)

[@AtlasCrafted]

Ryan's editing skills are improving

[@Jagentic]

You gave me something to think about here.

[@michaelmclane7968]

I was born in '67. My mom and dad had me when they were 19. Point being that history should never be lost and context over time is more and more revealing. Thank you for this. My dad would share history with me. My mom was a teacher. Now I watch, but more so listen to you. Peace

[@danielmartin7838]

No military industrial complex?! I thought learning Santa wasn’t real was a drag, thanks for dashing all my dreams Ryan

[@arthurmoore9488]

The truth is worse. Some parts are awesome, but the amount of paperwork sucks! Which is why the pay is so good. Except in some cases, the pay isn't really that good. :(

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

6:20 i would just like to ammend this, the weimar goverment had already been ignoring the treaty. the H-man just increased the intensity of breaking the treaty.

[@niagarawarrior9623]

"there's no industrial military complex" literally 5 minutes into this video i got a 4 minute long commercial telling me to invest in some military hardware company that was award a huge contract with 4 branches of US military.

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

If it’s the one I’m thinking of, that isn’t even made by any of the companies mentioned. It’s made by some guy who wants to convince you that you can “make good money” by following his advice… Only a fool would invest in Lockheed and expect to make a profit.

[@domn8t0r]

I love it when my perspective gets expanded so much in an unexpected way! Thanks Ryan!

[@jonatanolsen37]

If you were a weapon manufacturer, you would want loads of medium sized conflicts. Big enough to make people scared, small enough to not disrupt global economy. This is what we got now.

[@someaussieguy140]

So what, all these conflicts were started by shady men in suits looking to sell weapons? The reality is that there are countless political, geopolitical, idealogical, ethnic and religious reasons these wars are happening.

[@Greaseball01]

*MGS intro begins playing*

[@scottshawn70]

Isnt this also what weapons manufacturers would like on a national level? Certain institutions are always talking about how the government is going to ban/take our guns.. or gang members are infiltrating our country.. or civil war is coming.. anything to spurs weapon sales. If theres no threat theres no profit.

[@thebombcat]

That's why I like you Ryan, you are grounded in reality and bring common sense to issues people don't understand. Keep fighting the good fight.

[@StanwiseGamgee]

I dont get it. There's no military industrial complex because the top 5 companies only made $13 billion in profit? You listed many reasons why is hard to be successful in the defense industry and they're still making a profit, most (all?) is taxpayer money, and all the NATO countries are required to spend 3% of their gdp on defense from those top 5 contractors. And not everyone is programmed to loath the military industrial complex from Russian propaganda, they are companies that profit from war. They're held in a similar light to cigarette manufacturers.

[@driveswitharage]

I think this channel operator is either an influencer on the intelligence payroll, or perhaps just a jingoist who cheerleads for free the state and corporations who both start and fund wars.

[@JW77]

I worked in the semiconductor industry and once I chatted with our CEO about doing business with the US military. He told me that due to security reasons, we would have to give up all other markets or setup a completely separated business group just to serve the U.S. military. It’s really costly and that’s why defense contractors charge a lot. There really isn’t a lot of profit in it.

[@jeffgo5742]

If they weren’t making good profits they wouldn’t do it. They would make and sell something else

[@arthurmoore9488]

@@jeffgo5742 Huh, plenty of people operate in low profit businesses. Especially when they're extremely niche it can act as a nice stable business.

[@arthurmoore9488]

That's what people miss. They just look at revenue and assume the profit is being skimmed instead of how expensive it is to be a DOD contractor.

[@jstpsgthru]

Thanks for your post. I'm not sure I'm 100% sold. There are ways that money is hidden when it comes to government spending. I didn't take the time to review the financials because I don't know enough about the details, costs, and expenses. But, there are reports of exorbitantly expensive items (like the old toilet seat and hammer stories) that are newer than 2005. BTW, are you saying that the defense industry lobbyists are ineffective? I acknowledge that the sheer size of defense spending is so weighty, that it is scrutinized to the nth degree, like social programs.

[@ozaurelius4128]

Eisenhower warned us about the Complex Ryan. What would you say to his speech, And Kennedy's waring about secret organizations?

[@johnniiee146]

The military-industrial complex need not be an actively orchestrated and conspiratorial framework informing hawklike policy. More likely, it is simpler and more predictable-a frictionless pathway of incentives that naturally influences the direction of policy. Ironically, this dynamic requires a proactive and guiding hand to divert it away from its inherent trajectory. And when it comes to peace, several such hands in cooperative effort. In that sense, it is more accurately described as a military-industrial simplex. 😅

[@festekj]

The MIC isn’t “an organization”. No one ever claimed it was. Instead, the expression military-industrial complex (MIC) describes the relationship between a country's military and the defense industry (and its lobbyists) that supplies it, seen together as a vested interest which influences public policy

[@thisishappening7273]

Yes that’s what the video says.

[@player276]

Except the military, defense companies, as well as the civilian government are all comprised of various entities that themselves have clashing interests and goals. Yes they are "seen together", but that's only due to ignorance.

[@festekj]

@@player276 they aren’t seen together. Its like saying describing a couple as “married”. It describes a relationship. Except in the MIC case, it describes relationships between organizations and politicians who put their interests ahead of the electorate via legalized ‘corruption’ at the expense of taxpayers.

[@festekj]

@@player276 this channel often conflates topics and things and then”debunks” an inaccurate depiction of the conflated topic. Obviously if you broaden the scope of a topic it will be easily debunked.

[@IAmTheOnlyLucas]

A lazy bit of journalism which is done every year with the announcement of the US Govt.'s budget for the next fiscal year is reporting that "the defense budget is increased by however many billion dollars AGAIN." Yes, the defense budget was increased, as were the budgets for social security, medicare/medicaid, welfare, etc. The entire budget is increased year on year because the national GDP increased. But people don't have a conniption over social security's yearly mandatory budget increase because that's not news, it's boring. Defense spending as a percentage of GDP has only fallen since 2008 and generally trended downward since the Reagan era high 6% of GDP spent on defense.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Meanwhile NASA keeps getting bled like a vampire's favorite donor.

[@johnwest7993]

In WWII we were "firebombing an entire city" to destroy an entire city. The firebombing of Dresden killed 25,000 people. Who told Ryan otherwise?

[@VikingcustomLeather]

I Had no clue that P&G (HQed right in the town I live in, Mason, OH) has a net profit bigger that all 5 major defense contractors… and I’ve worked In defense sector/military my entire adult life. Mind = Blown. Great content.

[@colbunkmust]

Hilarious that Real Reporter did a response on your criticism on the Moscow Tank video calling it "soft propaganda" that was in my recommendations, love to hear what your response is, since I don't want to give that channel any views.

[@hackmind]

You should watch it. Hearing both sides enhance your critical thinking and see the propaganda in both sides of the aisle (yes Ryan has some bits of propaganda also)

[@domerame5913]

@@hackmind imagine comparing ryan to real reporter. you will only lose braincells listening to real reporter

[@hackmind]

@@domerame5913 your critical thinking skills are insignificant and dropping.

[@domerame5913]

@@hackmind There we go Ivan, don't do 'muh both sides', tell what you really think

[@hackmind]

@@domerame5913 am not russian neither pro russian 🤣😂. But if your really want to know. Here it is. Ryan is an agent of influence who now wants to engage in petty “intelligence operations” and a bit naive who thinks all america’s interventions are good. Konstantin on the other hand is a cheerleader of its country trying to propagandize as not backward appealing to americans in particular. For me who live outside those aisles see them as the same and I find some twisted fun listening to both. Manchilds.

[@ExpatStacker]

Interesting video. 2 points of rebuttal. First, 3 of the 5 tech firms you listed (Amazon, Microsoft, and Alphabet) have large contracts with the US Department of Defense, which would make them part of the Military Industrial Complex. Even many of the pharmaceutical companies you listed and some consumer product companies have contracts with the DoD, though, I think we can distinguish those in a different category outside of weapons systems manufacturers and tech. Second, you didn't prove that the military industrial complex doesn't exist. At best, you demonstrated that it has changed a lot with time. To be clear, I do not loathe or hate the Military Industrial Complex. But I think there are some significant holes in how you constructed and supported your argument that it doesn't exist.

[@bipolarbear7325]

Greetings from MCAAP in Oklahoma. You're right, ain't nobody getting rich around here. However: Every weekday at 11:00 a.m. I hear enormous explosions. If the sun is shining on a weekday, we're blowing up bombs. The EOD crews will tell you they're disposing of old ordinance while simultaneously new munitions are being made at the other end of the plant. Fine. That makes sense. However, the munitions being destroyed are nowhere near their "fresh by" date. We're literally detonating good units by the thousands to keep the folks at the other end of the property working. Can you give me any insight on that?

[@elimgarak1617]

I am guessing that they are not as reliable and effective as they were when first made, and are also getting more dangerous as they age. As an example from the other side of the world, look for the videos of Russian rockets that swerve in the air and fly directly back to the launcher, blowing it up. That's likely because the fuel in them settled to one side, creating uneven burn. Now that's likely extremely different from problems with US weapons, but it's the same class of issues.

[@bipolarbear7325]

@@elimgarak1617 I'm relying on what I was told by the EOD crews. They say the paint hasn't dried on some before they're ordered to dispose of them. The serial numbers tell the tale.

[@XTRaptor]

@@bipolarbear7325the military regularly fire off ammunition for the sole reason to buy new ammunition and it’s never because of the “Military Industrial Complex” it’s because of the use it or lose it mentality government accountants have. If your unit didn’t use all the ammunition you received this fiscal year then it’s because you clearly don’t need it so next year they give you less ammo. well we didn’t need it this year because of all the SHARPs meetings but next year we have that big training exercise and we will need it then. so they rather USE it then LOSE it. It’s because of shitty government accounting not corruption

[@Kyle-86]

@@bipolarbear7325without further context than your hearsay, my assumption is that each batch has to have a % reliability metric calculated over time. So the manufacturer holds some in reserve and tests a certain number each year and reports the failure rate. Manufacturers don’t want to do this - private sector never tests things to this level if they can get away with it. It’s the reliability requirements of the government contracts because they don’t want to be held responsible for anything going wrong

[@074523]

You miss the point. Sure there is time of inefficiencies in any organization - doesn't matter if it's a private company or a public bureaucracy like the military. The central point about the MIC is the bottom that this mighty conglomerate has enormous political power to direct public funding and to start wars to ensure demand for their products. That is the idea that Ryan attacks in this video. And you attach it as well with your story - since it shows that you don't need to conspire to start a war to ensure orders for new ammunition...

[@simonjohnston9488]

As someone who for most of my 50 years has been very skeptical about the need for military spending on the level it has been(and who fully bought into the 'military industrial complex' narrative), I completely agree with this Ryan, thank you. I recalibrated my thoughts on these issues during the Obama years. Not because of anything that happened, I just began paying more attention. As with my teenage Alex Jones years, that's all it really takes to start realizing it's nonsense. I think one thing that makes your solid argument hard to accept for so many, Ryan, is the likes of the Bush-Cheney administration dishonesty around the Iraq 2003 invasion, Cheney's company's insane no-bid contracts during said invasion, and the likes of Eric Prince(no explanation needed, I hope!). Such bad actors make it so much easier to believe that the entire industry is rotten - and the overtly, aggressively partisan attitude of so many prominent people in the industry - and within the armed forces. It's nice to see that changing, slowly though it may be.

[@aaron6973]

I don't loath those defense companies, I loath the politicians that point the weapons flippantly at our enemies.

[@danmorgan712]

I think you've changed the definition of MIC and then argued against it. That's one way about winning an argument, but not a good one. Edit: To be clear, the MIC does exist. It's a description of the relationship, not a claim that the relationship is inherently good, bad, or otherwise. It acknowledges the potential for abuse, not the existence of abuse. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the military is spending all funds as intelligently as reasonably possible without any corruption: GREAT! The MIC still exists. The MIC is a relationship that requires oversight. The fact that the oversight exists is evidence of the MIC still being a thing that needs to be monitored. If military funding is being allocated well, it is evidence of the oversight being done well. Again, great. I, if anything, think military spending given modern technological rivals may need to increase. It doesn't mean that I inherently trust politicians (lol) or profiteers. Please, define the term correctly so that you can instead argue that the MIC is being well managed, but arguing that it doesn't exist is, I hope, the result of a misunderstanding. If not, then what immense amount of respect I had for you was nice while it lasted.

[@Tadicuslegion78]

MIC: The barracks are full of black mold and dead rats in the walls but we just earned 90 million dollars convincing a General on our payroll the army needed new pens for officers.

[@zachowon]

That is more horrible allocation of funds then MIC. And the overreliqnce on contractors.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

@@zachowon I will never understand how privatization of things like barracks is supposed to save money. A private company is a profit-seeking entity. They will not take a contract if they are going to lose money or just break even. So even if the exact same money is spent, there will be a reduction in quality. And when there is fallout from that corner-cutting, instead of a request to a soldier's chain of command getting things fixed, it will likely involve lawyers (more money spent, yay) and court time to try and figure out if the contract was weak, or the company was slime (or both!) Worst case for the company, they have to do the work they were supposed to do, and a fine is paid to the court system. Meanwhile, soldiers have been taking in black mold for two years waiting for a fix.

[@Tadicuslegion78]

@@MonkeyJedi99 Who woulda thought gutting your infrastructure/support units and replacing them with greedy contractors would bite us in the ass the whole time /s

[@emptymannull]

We need to make you into a little statue of a Saint; St McBeth, the patron Saint of common sense. You my brother are preaching what I have been for 2 decades but my words have fallen on deaf ears. Ears of those who would rather subscribe to conspiracy theories and adversary propaganda. Now, I hope those same people are listening to you carefully and taking notes.

[@emptymannull]

@RyanMcBethProgramming - I'm dead serious. You as a 8-10" resin statue with a Hawiian shirt, a whiskey in your right hand, a cigar in the left, wearing a hooded robe. I know you can see it now hahaha!

[@kevinjenkins6986]

How does it not exist? There is a large arms industry here (military industrial) that is supported with a blank check from congress whether we are at war or not (complex)

[@mobygodfrey4936]

After I saw the trolls after the pod appearance I knew you'd have the info ready to show em what for

[@trusttech9942]

Another absolutely epic video. Thank you, Ryan.

[@trusttech9942]

@@jeddej7884 you’re a Putz. Take a look at how long I’ve been signed up for KZbin.

[@madeconomist458]

13:53 There's a *WONDERFUL* essay called "I, Pencil" by the economist Leonard Reed that tells the story of how a pencil is manufactured and illustrates the power of markets to create order spontaneously without direction by the state. I use it frequently when teaching economics and I have to say bravo for using this example. Here's Milton Friedman using the same example here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bGjXeaemlshordU

[@fredmdbud]

ah Milton Friedman, of "the only duty of a company is shareholder value" philosophy and its many perverse consequences ...

[@madeconomist458]

@@fredmdbud A CEO doing anything but maximizing shareholder value would constitute fraud and a breach of contract. The company *is owned* by the shareholders, that's the definition of a shareholder.

[@saltminer4463]

@@fredmdbudyeah companies are supposed to profit. That’s the whole fucking point

[@coced]

-There's no MIC -REEEEEEEEEE

[@victorb5]

Having a robust defense industry that can be scaled up as needed is very important in my opinion. That means a necessary amount of waste/expenditure to keep it running without an ongoing conflict. Eisenhower's speech is timeless, but should be adjusted in the degrees and focus to fit the times, which it seems like actually happened. I would say the more applicable concern that many probably mistakenly associate with the military industrial complex is the Other corporate/power interests and overall Department of Defense budget ($700 billion+) that have an active interest in perpetuating conflict/war because it's profitable for their own interests. Ex. Monsanto, Dupont and Vanguard? all have significant investments in Ukraine agriculture. Put aside politics, right/wrong, etc., but it would be a pretty safe bet to assume they have lobbyists seeking to protect their investments with various governments, which is fair and their right. I can't say how impactful their lobbying is, but this is where Eisenhower's speech would apply currently in my opinion. We should try to ensure that profitability and commercial interests (whether defense or general corporations) don't have an overly significant sway/hold over our policy decision both foreign and domestic lest we risk making suffering/war a profit oriented venture. The other category of concern that I think many people just lump in with the term "military industrial complex" is the Department of Defense's general budget. We spent 776 billion (about 13% of our budget) with the majority going to the DoD in 2023. That's a long sight more than the ~14 billion of the defense companies. The concern is that all of the taxpayer money doesn't seem to have a great deal of oversight. There was a request for the Pentagon to provide an accounting of its nearly $4 trillion in assets and couldn't itemize the majority of it. That's concerning and makes the average citizen wonder about how well things are being handled when we are leaving billions of dollars worth of equipment behind in places like Afghanistan.

[@spiff1003]

Thank you! I didn't really pay much attention to this phenomena called "Military Industrial Complex". I didn't doubt that it existed either, but you put me straight here. Thanks again!

[@opiesmith9270]

Damn. You really changed my entire perspective on this. Nice job Ryan.

[@LuciousVBogeymanProd]

The government takes security of weapons very very seriously. When I was staying at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, a guard unit lost an M16 rifle. They shut down the whole base for most of a day until the weapon was found. That proves that the government is very careful with weapons, so the United States Government doesn't lose weapons. Fast and Furious was impossible, no weapons have ever gone unaccounted for. I mean, that's proven by how seriously they take a single rifle..... My concern about the Military Industrial Complex is increased by your video. Eisenhower was repeating the same warnings the founders of this country gave about a standing Army. To claim its a concern that has become obsolete is absurd. The wisdom and fact of the corrupting power of power and money are eternal. "We're making all these weapons, probably going to use them." - Your observation about 1930s Germany.

[@hackmind]

They care about missing weapons in bases inside the territory of the USA. Look at all the weapons and equipment left behind in Afghanistan (that we know of)

[@scottcobb3691]

😂😂😂 Why don't you ask Eric holder about operation Fast & Furious? I swear. This guy's KZbin channel is full of people that are MSNBC watchers. Peter Griffin. Pmc chappy Preston stewart and others Are straight up propagandis. That's why these people get involved in like a NATO youth summit.

[@MindsDozer]

MIC refers to the corruption of policy makers by financial incentives to increase military spending. To prove it's existing is simply a matter of looking at Congress' stock trading history.

[@ibeetellingya5683]

Looking at just the numbers misses the real point about the military-industrial complex. It's not just about money-it's about the outsized influence this sector has on U.S. policy, global arms sales, and decisions of war and peace. While industries like pharma, finance, and tech also have significant influence and life-and-death consequences, the military-industrial complex is unique in its direct impact on armed conflict, weapons proliferation, and global instability. The revolving door between government and defense isn't just about dollars; it's about shaping national and global security in ways that often bypass public debate. This is why its influence is uniquely critical to scrutinize.

[@ryanbthiesant2307]

It seems like you’re missing the point of profit on purpose. If the military budget gets bigger, but military gets smaller, then what is happening with the margin. The profit.

[@dodododododododo8216]

He also failed to mention the 800 billion government funding

[@craig.a.glesner]

I do love that I am old enough that when Motorola came up, I didn’t think of phones at all but every radio in an emergency vehicle. :)

[@Pete_952]

Defense contractors make much more than was listed. It's tricky accounting, where R&D gets folded into expense, even when the Feds pay for it. Also, the DOD may have fewer ships and planes, look at the cost: a Huey in '69 cost $150k, an Apache is $52 million. An F-16 for each flight hr. Has 16 hrs of maintenance, who gets that money? In 1990 DOD budget was $325 m. In 2023, it was $820 m. It goes on and on. Edit: as to GDP Spending we spent 4.5% of $3 T in 1979. In 2023 we spent 3.1 % of $27 T. I'm no math genius but 3% of $27trillion is a whole lot bigger % than 3% of $3 trillion.

[@hackmind]

Is the old saying. A good accountant must prove - to your investors you make profits - to the goverment you lose money - to your creditors you have liquidity

[@chaosXP3RT]

What about inflation?

[@samueldamewood5273]

The difference is that practically speaking the profits of P & G don't come from tax money, the profits of defense contractors ALL come from taxpayers. And Congress is the big consumer of tax dollars. When Milton Eisenhower originally wrote that speech it was the Military, Industrial, Congressional Complex.

[@Rom2Serge]

Some people do believe that round earth is a lie. If one will tell enough times that military industrial complex is a lie too people will eat it. Production or arms is an industry. Any industry is interested in increasing its revenue . This boy is saying that the arms industry is magically different.

[@veronicamaine3813]

Yeah and the tax payers aren’t actually paying all that much in the grand scheme of things. It’s hardly Apple money is it? And you have to ask yourself, let’s say the US cut its defence budget to 0 tomorrow , what do you think China and Russia would do? Do you think they would leave the US nicely nestled in Peace as the most powerful economy in the world, sitting on a cornucopia of resources they could only dream of? Yes even Russia could not hope to have the resources America has and China is remarkably poor in resources (they import nearly everything necessary for life). We are only lucky that the forest is not dark on earth.

[@HyzersGR]

What difference does that make?

[@Soupasnake]

The profits of road workers ALL come from taxpayers too. It's not really a great point when you stop to think about it, huh?

[@viysnjor4811]

@@veronicamaine3813 It also wouldn't noticeably affect taxes, youd pay what, like 2 or 3 cents less per dollar of tax?

[@Deecups510]

Great analysis. Great take. I read about the Last Supper recently and it was one of the most fascinating and unexpected reads in a long time. The amount of "mom and pop" defense contractors before then was absurd.

[@kjimbo5569]

Ryan… you know fixed bids make the minority of contracts. And calling everything you disagree with “misinformation” is misinformation.

[@haruhisuzumiya6650]

While that's true but it needs to be stressed that not everything has enough evidence to be worthwhile to be pursued definitely or at least a Claim must reach a certain standard of proof

[@janitorizamped]

How is this a valid reply? How do you think this refutes what he said?

[@saltminer4463]

If something isn’t factually correct it is objectively misinformation. If he brings up evidence to disprove what you’re saying then he is in the right calling it misinformation.

[@pauleohl]

Corporate profits is not a useful measure of how profitable a business is to the people who profit the most from said business. A better measure would be to add up the total compensation of the top 100 compensation packages of each of the 5 contactors you enumerated.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

The wages and bonuses can't be higher than revenue unless someone has found the cheat code (fraud).

[@Archone666]

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD They found it. Just ask Sears.

[@ff05t81t]

I think that one debacle about sending Ukraine ATACMS cause we had a very limited number also disproves the military industrial complex. We needed to make the modern short ranged missiles first so we wouldn’t be left defenseless.

[@redhairangus]

You hit us with the Milton Friedman pencil!! Excellent video

[@berningid]

Ryan Macbeth, the voice of reason, logic and arguments. You're godsend! Greetings from 🇩🇪

[@shannononeil2751]

That was an excellent presentation and very convincing! Plus no cigar in your kisser, which invariably causes you to slur your speech. I'm impressed! 😂🤣😂

[@zacappleton474]

Shouldn’t your accounting include KBR, Halliburton, and whatever those PMCs became?

[@RyanMcBethProgramming]

A lot of those companies are dual use. They offer oilfield services and so on. They’re not strictly military contractors companies like Halliburton got contracts to build bases because they build man camps at oil Fields. They are really the only company that can do that.

[@zacappleton474]

@@RyanMcBethProgramming : thanks, what I’m driving at is how much of the military-industrial complex is now actually a military-industrial-service contract complex, and I do not know how that is accounted for, or how different that may be from say, an Aramark fulfilling conference meals at a convention center, for example. Thanks again for your videos and taking the time.

[@giovanni-ed7zq]

@@RyanMcBethProgramming konstaine rozkov of Real Reporter Channel just made a disparaging reaction video to your video on him.

[@giovanni-ed7zq]

@@RyanMcBethProgramming its kind of funny constantine rozkov interviews a russian who was also in the marines and he says every time a himars gets destroyed in ukraine, 4 americans also are killed.

[@giovanni-ed7zq]

@@RyanMcBethProgramming so you have some nice content to make on constantine rozkov's video as well as the so called experts he brings in from russia to dispute your claims.

[@Curmudgeon2]

I guess the diaper makers must really know their shit..

[@wessexdruid7598]

One would hope so...

[@allenshepard7992]

Quick response. 1950 and most of 1960 homes had 1 (one) black and white (B&W) television. We had time to read. There was only one telephone line - it was printed publicly. People knew not to prank call nor call before 8 am nor during the dinner hour. We had time to read and talk to each other. No microwaves so cooking and table setting took time. No re-runs. See it live or miss it. Later in 1965 the color TV was mass produced. That separated the well to do from the poor more than who played with whom or stayed over for dinner. We went from "make an army when you needed it" to keeping a standing army and the factories running. Where else would these people work ? Many were proud of what they did during the war - (WW-II, not Korean) Vietnam was becoming a blight. Air raid sirens still blared Saturday's at noon (this told kids cartoons are over. Time to play outside) I'm glad we have a military group or industrial complex. If the world has swords, I want a shotgun. If the world has air bombers, I want missiles and a bunker. Set us up for success because we saw England, Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war. B&W war movies and news reels were still fresh in our minds. Non of that was CGI nor special effects. This is a bad source, but the best I could find. Hollywood used to use live ammo in movies Source: www.quora.com/Did-they-use-real-bullets-in-old-movies Yes, the images of war were real and "It could happen here" Far less fantasy in 1950, 1960 and most of 1970 till "Star Wars" I hope this was worth the time to read. I thank you for your work Ryan.

[@kenfowler1980]

Same thing happened in Australia, England & Europe great video mate!

[@julian_online]

The problem with your analysis is that P&G has worldwide operations (180 countries) while the military industrial companies basically rely on US taxpayer money and get very high revenue compared to amount of jobs/tangible investments. If your assumption was real why they don't invest in consumer products, well they know they can get away with one client that has no incentive to get value from them and that is not dependent upon economic turmoil.

[@mattteee2973]

None of that is true though, they all have staff, research centres and factories all over the world too. Lockheed Martin have a facility 10mins from my house here in the UK. Knowing someone that works there it sounds like a nightmare industry to be in- you might get a big contract but then go a decade without any sign of anything else coming along. Never being sure if you'll have a job in a few months doesn't sound great to me.

[@bvglee9731]

Ryan: I'm gonna expose the MIC! MIC: "Don't Stop Believing" intensifies. Ryan: IT. DOESN'T. EXIST!!! MIC: Oh! Nevermind

[@Nick-ij2yy]

"The Military Industrial Complex's Biggest Fanboy Defends his Paycheck" there fixed the title for you.

[@johnn.4407]

Never understood beating up on OUR weapons manufacturers who we need to make the best weapons on the battlefield. Great video.

[@lenfest]

Wow, you really outsmarted yourself on this one