I’m not your down voter and you are right to look into the numbers but:
One problem with these figures is that privatised healthcare is more expensive p/p than public healthcare. So focusing on paying for healthcare rather than (foreign) military spending (which would also suggest a systemic change away from a mostly privatised model) would significantly decrease the total cost of healthcare (for the same provision), whereas the foreign military spending would at best stay the same (for the same provision).
So those numbers are likely incomparable.
Also, $68b spent on preventive or rehabilitative programs would have an exponential effect on decreasing overall healthcare spending, by e.g. spotting problems before they require expensive, possibly lifelong treatments. Again, making the figures incomparable.
I’m not your down voter and you are right to look into the numbers but:
One problem with these figures is that privatised healthcare is more expensive p/p than public healthcare. So focusing on paying for healthcare rather than (foreign) military spending (which would also suggest a systemic change away from a mostly privatised model) would significantly decrease the total cost of healthcare (for the same provision), whereas the foreign military spending would at best stay the same (for the same provision).
So those numbers are likely incomparable.
Also, $68b spent on preventive or rehabilitative programs would have an exponential effect on decreasing overall healthcare spending, by e.g. spotting problems before they require expensive, possibly lifelong treatments. Again, making the figures incomparable.