United States US: Military Expenditure data was reported at 609.758 USD bn in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 600.106 USD bn for 2016. United States US: Military Expenditure data is updated yearly, averaging 277.591 USD bn from Sep 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 711.338 USD bn in 2011 and a record low of 45.380 USD bn in 1960. United States US: Military Expenditure data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are judged to be trained and equipped for military operations; and military space activities. Such expenditures include military and civil personnel, including retirement pensions of military personnel and social services for personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; military research and development; and military aid (in the military expenditures of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and current expenditures for previous military activities, such as for veterans' benefits, demobilization, conversion, and destruction of weapons. This definition cannot be applied for all countries, however, since that would require much more detailed information than is available about what is included in military budgets and off-budget military expenditure items. (For example, military budgets might or might not cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police and paramilitary forces, dual-purpose forces such as military and civilian police, military grants in kind, pensions for military personnel, and social security contributions paid by one part of government to another.); ; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.; ; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates. For additional details please refer to the military expenditure database on the SIPRI website: https://sipri.org/databases/milex

United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data was reported at 3.149 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 3.222 % for 2016. United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data is updated yearly, averaging 4.864 % from Sep 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 9.063 % in 1967 and a record low of 2.908 % in 1999. United States US: Military Expenditure: % of GDP data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are judged to be trained and equipped for military operations; and military space activities. Such expenditures include military and civil personnel, including retirement pensions of military personnel and social services for personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; military research and development; and military aid (in the military expenditures of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and current expenditures for previous military activities, such as for veterans' benefits, demobilization, conversion, and destruction of weapons. This definition cannot be applied for all countries, however, since that would require much more detailed information than is available about what is included in military budgets and off-budget military expenditure items. (For example, military budgets might or might not cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police and paramilitary forces, dual-purpose forces such as military and civilian police, military grants in kind, pensions for military personnel, and social security contributions paid by one part of government to another.); ; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.; Weighted average; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

Detailed listing of all U.S. Military Active Duty deaths for 2007

Detailed listing of all U.S. Military Active Duty deaths since 1/1/2001 giving branch of service, age at death, military occupational code, location of death, and casualty category

SELECTED SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS IN THE UNITED STATES VETERAN STATUS - DP02 Universe - Civilian population 18 Year and over Survey-Program - American Community Survey 5-year estimates Years - 2020, 2021, 2022 Veteran status is used to identify people with active duty military service and service in the military Reserves and the National Guard. Veterans are men and women who have served (even for a short time), but are not currently serving, on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or the Coast Guard, or who served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II. People who served in the National Guard or Reserves are classified as veterans only if they were ever called or ordered to active duty, not counting the 4-6 months for initial training or yearly summer camps.

The United States Military Installations database contains the boundaries and location information for important military installations in the United States and Puerto Rico. The database includes records for 405 military installations.

Purpose

To provide graphic representation, location and attribute data for analysis, modeling and simulation, and studies. CLOSURE, REALIGN, and BRAC columns are from the office of Economic Adjustment and OSD websites at http://www.oea.gov , https://www.denix.osd.mil .

The Military Bases dataset was last updated on October 23, 2024 and are defined by Fiscal Year 2023 data, from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment and is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The dataset depicts the authoritative locations of the most commonly known Department of Defense (DoD) sites, installations, ranges, and training areas world-wide. These sites encompass land which is federally owned or otherwise managed. This dataset was created from source data provided by the four Military Service Component headquarters and was compiled by the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastructure (DISDI) Program within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment. Only sites reported in the BSR or released in a map supplementing the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA) Real Estate Regulation (31 CFR Part 802) were considered for inclusion. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities. For inventory purposes, installations are comprised of sites, where a site is defined as a specific geographic location of federally owned or managed land and is assigned to military installation. DoD installations are commonly referred to as a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction, custody, control of the DoD. While every attempt has been made to provide the best available data quality, this data set is intended for use at mapping scales between 1:50,000 and 1:3,000,000. For this reason, boundaries in this data set may not perfectly align with DoD site boundaries depicted in other federal data sources. Maps produced at a scale of 1:50,000 or smaller which otherwise comply with National Map Accuracy Standards, will remain compliant when this data is incorporated. Boundary data is most suitable for larger scale maps; point locations are better suited for mapping scales between 1:250,000 and 1:3,000,000. If a site is part of a Joint Base (effective/designated on 1 October, 2010) as established under the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process, it is attributed with the name of the Joint Base. All sites comprising a Joint Base are also attributed to the responsible DoD Component, which is not necessarily the pre-2005 Component responsible for the site.

This information is designed to provide service members, their families, veterans, the general public, and other concerned citizens with the most comprehensive and accurate figures available regarding diagnosed cases of TBI within the U.S. military. Information is collected from electronic medical records and analyzed by the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center in cooperation with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center. Numbers for the current year will be updated on a quarterly basis. Other data will be updated annually. At this time, the MHS is unable to provide information regarding cause of injury or location because that information is not available in most medical records. The numbers represent actual medical diagnoses of TBI within the U.S. Military. Other, larger numbers routinely reported in the media must be considered inaccurate because they do not reflect actual medical diagnoses. Many of these larger numbers are developed utilizing sources such as the Post Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) or Post Deployment Health Reassessment (PDHRA). However, these documents are assessment tools with TBI screening questions and are not diagnostic tools.

United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data was reported at 1,348,400.000 Person in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,347,300.000 Person for 2015. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data is updated yearly, averaging 1,546,000.000 Person from Sep 1985 (Median) to 2016, with 29 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,240,000.000 Person in 1989 and a record low of 1,347,300.000 Person in 2015. United States US: Armed Forces Personnel: Total data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Armed forces personnel are active duty military personnel, including paramilitary forces if the training, organization, equipment, and control suggest they may be used to support or replace regular military forces.; ; International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance.; Sum; Data for some countries are based on partial or uncertain data or rough estimates.

Military Expenditure in the United States increased to 876943.20 USD Million in 2022 from 806230.20 USD Million in 2021. United States Military Expenditure - values, historical data, forecasts and news - updated on March of 2025.

The dataset depicts the authoritative locations of the most commonly known Department of Defense (DoD) sites, installations, ranges, and training areas in the United States and Territories. These sites encompass land which is federally owned or otherwise managed. This dataset was created from source data provided by the four Military Service Component headquarters and was compiled by the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastructure (DISDI) Program within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, Business Enterprise Integration Directorate. Sites were selected from the 2009 Base Structure Report (BSR), a summary of the DoD Real Property Inventory. This list does not necessarily represent a comprehensive collection of all Department of Defense facilities, and only those in the fifty United States and US Territories were considered for inclusion. For inventory purposes, installations are comprised of sites, where a site is defined as a specific geographic location of federally owned or managed land and is assigned to military installation. DoD installations are commonly referred to as a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction, custody, control of the DoD.

VBA EDUCATION BENEFITS PROGRAM to provide educational assistance to persons entering the Armed Forces after December 31, 1976, and before July 1, 1985; to assist persons in obtaining an education they might otherwise not be able to afford; and to promote and assist the all volunteer military program of the United States by attracting qualified persons to serve in the Armed Forces. The participant must have entered on active duty on or after January 1, 1977, and before July 1, 1985, and either served on active duty for more than 180 continuous days receiving an other than dishonorable discharge, or have been discharged after January, 1, 1977 because of a service-connected disability. Also eligible are participants who serve for more than 180 days and who continue on active duty and have completed their first period of obligated service (or 6 years of active duty, whichever comes first). Participants must also have satisfactorily contributed to the program. (Satisfactory contribution consists of monthly deduction of $25 to $100 from military pay, up to a maximum of $2,700, for deposit in a special training fund.) Participants may make lump-sum contributions. No individuals on active duty in the Armed Forces may initially begin contributing to this program after March 31, 1987.

This dataset, released by DoD, contains geographic information for major installations, ranges, and training areas in the United States and its territories. This release integrates site information about DoD installations, training ranges, and land assets in a format which can be immediately put to work in commercial geospatial information systems. Homeland Security/Homeland Defense, law enforcement, and readiness planners will benefit from immediate access to DoD site location data during emergencies. Land use planning and renewable energy planning will also benefit from use of this data. Users are advised that the point and boundary location datasets are intended for planning purposes only, and do not represent the legal or surveyed land parcel boundaries.

Military Divisions of the U.S. Army Corp of EngineersThis U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) feature layer depicts USACE's military divisions. Per USACE, "Military Missions provide premier engineering, construction, real estate, stability operations, and environmental management products and services for the Army, Air Force, other assigned U.S. Government agencies and foreign governments."South Atlantic Military DivisionData currency: current federal service (USACE Military Divisions)Data modification: noneFor more information, please visit: Military MissionsFor feedback: ArcGIScomNationalMaps@esri.comU.S. Army Corp of EngineersPer USACE, "With environmental sustainability as a guiding principle, our disciplined Corps team is working diligently to strengthen our Nation’s security by building and maintaining America’s infrastructure and providing military facilities where our servicemembers train, work and live. We are also researching and developing technology for our war fighters while protecting America’s interests abroad by using our engineering expertise to promote stability and improve quality of life."

VBA EDUCATION BENEFITS PROGRAM to provide educational assistance to persons entering the Armed Forces after December 31, 1976, and before July 1, 1985; to assist persons in obtaining an education they might otherwise not be able to afford; and to promote and assist the all volunteer military program of the United States by attracting qualified persons to serve in the Armed Forces. The participant must have entered on active duty on or after January 1, 1977, and before July 1, 1985, and either served on active duty for more than 180 continuous days receiving an other than dishonorable discharge, or have been discharged after January, 1, 1977 because of a service-connected disability. Also eligible are participants who serve for more than 180 days and who continue on active duty and have completed their first period of obligated service (or 6 years of active duty, whichever comes first). Participants must also have satisfactorily contributed to the program. (Satisfactory contribution consists of monthly deduction of $25 to $100 from military pay, up to a maximum of $2,700, for deposit in a special training fund.) Participants may make lump-sum contributions. No individuals on active duty in the Armed Forces may initially begin contributing to this program after March 31, 1987.

Hourly observations taken by U.S. Air Force personnel at bases in the United States and around the world. Foreign observations concentrated in the Middle East and Japan. Stations assigned WBAN numbers. Original forms sent from the Air Force to NCDC by agreement and stored in the NCDC archives.

Over the course of the Second World War approximately 127.2 million people were mobilized. The world's population in 1940 was roughly 2.3 billion, meaning that between five and six percent of the world was drafted into the military in some capacity. Approximately one in every 25 people mobilized were women, who generally served in an administrative or medical role, although hundreds of thousands of women did see active combat. Largest armies In absolute numbers, the Soviet Union mobilized the largest number of people at just under 34.5 million, and this included roughly 35 percent of the USSR's male population. By the war's end, more Soviets were mobilized than all European Axis powers combined. However, in relative terms, it was Germany who mobilized the largest share of its male population, with approximately 42 percent of men serving. The USSR was forced to find a balance between reinforcing its frontlines and maintaining agricultural and military production to supply its army (in addition to those in annexed territory after 1941), whereas a large share of soldiers taken from the German workforce were replaced by workers drafted or forcibly taken from other countries (including concentration camp prisoners and PoWs). Studying the figures The figures given in these statistics are a very simplified and rounded overview - in reality, there were many nuances in the number of people who were effectively mobilized for each country, their roles, and their status as auxiliary, collaborative, or resistance forces. The British Empire is the only power where distinctions are made between the metropole and its colonies or territories, whereas breakdowns of those who fought in other parts of Asia or Africa remains unclear. Additionally, when comparing this data with total fatalities, it is important to account for the civilian death toll, i.e. those who were not mobilized.

Perception of security and threats: personal feeling of security; personal significance of various aspects of security (e.g. job security, military security, social security, security of income, ecological security, etc.) Interest in politics in general, in foreign policy, in security and defence policy as well as interest in the Federal Armed Forces; security policy interest at the beginning of the 1980s; security policy strategy of ´deterrence´ as a guarantee for peace in Europe, necessary Realpolitik or a threat to humanity; advocacy or rejection of military force; change in personal attitude towards military force; Reasons for change of attitude; reasons for not changing attitudes; personal relationship to the peace movement in the early 1980s and today; opinion on pacifism; opinion on the extent of public debate on security policy issues and on the Federal Armed Forces; future development of the number of international conflicts after the end of the Cold War; likelihood of a military threat to Germany; feeling threatened by: environmental destruction, violence, hatred, crime, unemployment, world wars, right-wing extremism, financial problems, new technologies, diseases and population growth; threat to world peace from various countries and regions (Islamic states, Third World, Russia, Central/Eastern Europe, USA, Western Europe, Germany, Middle East, China); current that will prevail worldwide in the future (national or nationalist thinking vs. voluntary cooperation and interdependence); assessment of nationalist thinking; assessment of voluntary cooperation; suitability of various institutions and instruments to protect Germany against military risks (NATO membership, other/ new treaties with neighbouring countries, United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), Federal Armed Forces, European Army, general disarmament, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)). 2. Security policy attitudes, foreign missions of the Federal Armed Forces: Germany´s role in the world: preference for a rather active vs. rather passive international policy of Germany; approved or rejected measures for Germany´s international action (e.g. aid with food and medicine, aid of a financial and economic nature, technical aid by civil organisations, peacekeeping mission of the Federal Armed Forces within the framework of a UN mission, etc.); opinion on the peace-keeping mission of the Federal Armed Forces in various countries and regions (Eastern Europe, Russia, the Middle East, South-East Asia, Africa, NATO states, Western Europe; opinion on the future role of a state´s military power; opinion on the future staffing level of the Federal Armed Forces; assessment of Germany´s defence expenditure; general attitude towards the Federal Armed Forces. 3. Evaluation of public institutions: Institutional trust (Federal Constitutional Court, other courts, police, Bundesrat, state government, Federal Armed Forces, Bundestag, television, press, churches, trade unions, federal government, education, political parties); reliance on the Federal Armed Forces. 4. Attitude towards compulsory military service: Military service or alternative civilian service more important for society; decision for or against various community services (care of the sick, care of the elderly, military service/defence, care of the disabled, environmental protection/remedy of environmental damage, care of children in need of help, service with the police, border guards or fire brigade); community service which the interviewee would be most likely to opt for social service most likely to be refused; general attitude towards military service; opinion on the right to conscientious objection; frequency of different reasons for conscientious objection (religious reasons, military service as time lost, political reasons, military service not compatible with conscience, civilian service as a more convenient way, economic reasons, civilian service with greater benefit to society); general compulsory military service retained vs. conversion into a voluntary army; future of the Federal Armed Forces (Federal Armed Forces should be abolished, citizen´s army based on the Swiss model, purely voluntary army, current mix of conscripts, professional and temporary soldiers should be retained, fewer professional and temporary soldiers more military exercises for former soldiers); preference for the future of the Federal Armed Forces. 5. Tasks of the Federal Armed Forces: Preferences with regard to the tasks of the Federal Armed Forces (tasks of international arms control, fight against international terrorism, fight against international drug trafficking, border security against illegal immigrants, tasks in the field of environmental protection, international disaster relief, humanitarian aid and rescue services, reconstruction and development aid, international military advice, Combat operations on behalf of and under the control of the UN or other international organisations, peacekeeping operations on behalf of and under the control of the UN or international organisations, protection of the constitutional order in Germany, participation in celebrations and ceremonies, education and character building, defence of Germany, defence of allies, aid for threatened friendly nations); evaluation of the deployment of German soldiers in various UN missions with regard to: care of the suffering population, promotion of the international community, integration of Germany, strengthening of German national interests, stabilisation of world peace, strengthening of the reputation of the Federal Armed Forces, enforcement of human rights, establishment of democracy in the country of deployment, protection of the population in the country of deployment; assessment of the armament and equipment of the Federal Armed Forces; assessment of leadership training in the Federal Armed Forces; assessment of ´soldiering´ as a profession; personal acquaintance with a Federal Armed Forces soldier; personal advice to a relative or friend when considering volunteering for the Federal Armed Forces; importance of co-determination in civilian enterprises; importance of co-determination for soldiers in peacetime; preferences for voluntary service by women in the Federal Armed Forces (women do not belong in the Federal Armed Forces, only in unarmed service, all uses should be open to women); opinion on the complete withdrawal of US troops from Germany; opinion on the complete withdrawal of the Federal Armed Forces from the region; agreement on various possibilities for a new German security policy (extension of NATO security guarantees to Eastern Europe, common European foreign and security policy, restructuring of the military, return to national German interests, strengthening of political cooperation); the importance for Germany of a permanent seat on the UN Security Council; attitudes towards citizens of various neighbouring countries (Belgians, Danes, French, Dutch, Austrians, Poles, Swiss, Czechs and Luxemburgers); the most positive attitudes and the most negative attitudes towards neighbours; a feeling of belonging as West Germans, East Germans, Germans, Europeans or world citizens. 6. Military cooperation in Europe: familiarity of various associations with soldiers from different nations (e.g. German-French Brigade, Eurocorps, German-American Corps, German-Dutch Corps); opinion on military cooperation with various countries (USA, France, Netherlands, England, Belgium, Denmark, Italy); opinion on the creation of a European army; opinion on the political unification of Europe; opinion on the introduction of a common European currency, the Euro; evaluation of the performance of the Federal Armed Forces with regard to reunification in comparison to other institutions (trade unions, churches, political parties, employers´ associations, sports associations and media); opinion on the future NATO deployment of Federal Armed Forces combat troops. Demography: Sex; age (year of birth); education; additional vocational training; occupation; occupational group; net household income; marital status; denomination; residential environment (degree of urbanisation); city size; federal state; household size; number of persons in household aged 16 and over; Left-Right Self-Placement. Additionally coded: Respondent ID; age (categorised); West/East; weight.

Marital Status of Active Duty Forces

analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D