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

https://i.imgur.com/Vrs6apv.png" alt="">

Context

There is a well-documented phenomenon of increased suicide rates among United States military veterans. One recent analysis, published in 2016, found the suicide rate amongst veterans to be around 20 per day. The widespread nature of the problem has resulted in efforts by and pressure on the United States military services to combat and address mental health issues in and after service in the country's armed forces.

In 2013 News21 published a sequence of reports on the phenomenon, aggregating and using data provided by individual states to typify the nationwide pattern. This dataset is the underlying data used in that report, as collected by the News21 team.

Content

The data consists of six files, one for each year between 2005 and 2011. Each year's worth of data includes the general population of each US state, a count of suicides, a count of state veterans, and a count of veteran suicides.

Acknowledgements

This data was originally published by News21. It has been converted from an XLS to a CSV format for publication on Kaggle. The original data, visualizations, and stories can be found at the source.

Inspiration

What is the geospatial pattern of veterans in the United States? How much more vulnerable is the average veteran to suicide than the average citizen? Is the problem increasing or decreasing over time?

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. Source: National Transportation Atlas Database URL: http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_atlas_database/2006/

Military Facilities. The dataset contains locations and attributes of Military Facilities, created as part of the DC Geographic Information System (DC GIS) for the D.C. Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO) and participating D.C. government agencies. Information researched by the DC Office of the Chief Technology Officer identified Military Facilities and DC GIS staff geo-processed the data.

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 since 1/1/2001 giving branch of service, age at death, military occupational code, location of death, and casualty category

This report presents findings from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) with a focus on comparing estimates related to substance use and mental health for military family members (spouses and children) with general population estimates. The numbers of military family members included in the 2015 NSDUH were relatively small. As a consequence, the report focuses on wives aged 18 to 49 and children aged 12 to 17. In the general area of substance use, the report includes estimates for past year use of any illicit substances (marijuana, cocaine in any form including crack, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, and methamphetamine and misuse of four categories of prescription drugs -- pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants and sedatives), past year cigarette use, past year alcohol use (both any use and binge use), and past year treatment for substance use, including alcohol use. In the general area of mental health, the report includes estimates for any mental illness (AMI) in the past year for wives. For both wives and children, the report includes estimates for past year major depressive episode (MDE) and mental health service use. For children, estimates of mental health service are reported by general treatment setting (e.g., mental health, educational, medical). As additional years of data become available, it will be possible in future reports to include both male and female spouses and to make more detailed comparisons -- for example for more specific types of illicit substances used and for treatment received by setting, by race/ethnicity and for spouses, by employment and educational background.

Time series data for the statistic Military_Expenditure_USD and country United States. Indicator Definition: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).The statistic "Military Expenditure USD" stands at 916,014,700,000.00 United States Dollars as of 12/31/2023, the highest value at least since 12/31/1961, the period currently displayed. Regarding the One-Year-Change of the series, the current value constitutes an increase of 6.43 percent compared to the value the year prior.The 1 year change in percent is 6.43.The 3 year change in percent is 17.68.The 5 year change in percent is 34.22.The 10 year change in percent is 34.86.The Serie's long term average value is 349,632,192,410.91 United States Dollars. It's latest available value, on 12/31/2023, is 161.99 percent higher, compared to it's long term average value.The Serie's change in percent from it's minimum value, on 12/31/1960, to it's latest available value, on 12/31/2023, is +1,834.70%.The Serie's change in percent from it's maximum value, on 12/31/2023, to it's latest available value, on 12/31/2023, is 0.0%.

This dataset tracks the updates made on the dataset "Spouses and Children of U.S. Military Personnel: Results from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health" as a repository for previous versions of the data and metadata.

This dataset displays the number of active duty personnel and their location, by country. Included in these figures are the numbers for Army, Navy, Marine, and Air Force branches of the United States Military. Note: this data includes rounded figures for personnel involved in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). This data was collected from the department of Defense directly at: http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MILITARY/history/hst0706.pdf .

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.

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F954461%2F41f0017368e1043a2c643aea10cbb3e4%2FgoogleDataStudio.jpg?generation=1561570478866938&alt=media" alt="">

Context

This dataset will be used to help users get familiar with Google Data Studio. It's also a great way to mix history with data visualization skills.

Later I will develop a lesson that will help new users get up to speed with Google Data Studio. This dataset is small, but it will be a good dataset to start with. The same concepts learned with this project will be used with larger datasets.

Content

This data comes from wikipedia.

Acknowledgements

wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war

Inspiration

Project based learning. Get it going! Teach kids using data.

decisions involve claims related to uniformed service members' pay, allowances, travel, transportation, retired pay, and survivor benefits

A dataset to advance the study of life-cycle interactions of biomedical and socioeconomic factors in the aging process. The EI project has assembled a variety of large datasets covering the life histories of approximately 39,616 white male volunteers (drawn from a random sample of 331 companies) who served in the Union Army (UA), and of about 6,000 African-American veterans from 51 randomly selected United States Colored Troops companies (USCT). Their military records were linked to pension and medical records that detailed the soldiers������?? health status and socioeconomic and family characteristics. Each soldier was searched for in the US decennial census for the years in which they were most likely to be found alive (1850, 1860, 1880, 1900, 1910). In addition, a sample consisting of 70,000 men examined for service in the Union Army between September 1864 and April 1865 has been assembled and linked only to census records. These records will be useful for life-cycle comparisons of those accepted and rejected for service. Military Data: The military service and wartime medical histories of the UA and USCT men were collected from the Union Army and United States Colored Troops military service records, carded medical records, and other wartime documents. Pension Data: Wherever possible, the UA and USCT samples have been linked to pension records, including surgeon''''s certificates. About 70% of men in the Union Army sample have a pension. These records provide the bulk of the socioeconomic and demographic information on these men from the late 1800s through the early 1900s, including family structure and employment information. In addition, the surgeon''''s certificates provide rich medical histories, with an average of 5 examinations per linked recruit for the UA, and about 2.5 exams per USCT recruit. Census Data: Both early and late-age familial and socioeconomic information is collected from the manuscript schedules of the federal censuses of 1850, 1860, 1870 (incomplete), 1880, 1900, and 1910. Data Availability: All of the datasets (Military Union Army; linked Census; Surgeon''''s Certificates; Examination Records, and supporting ecological and environmental variables) are publicly available from ICPSR. In addition, copies on CD-ROM may be obtained from the CPE, which also maintains an interactive Internet Data Archive and Documentation Library, which can be accessed on the Project Website. * Dates of Study: 1850-1910 * Study Features: Longitudinal, Minority Oversamples * Sample Size: ** Union Army: 35,747 ** Colored Troops: 6,187 ** Examination Sample: 70,800 ICPSR Link: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06836

KAV 4271 First signed 02/09/1995 Last signed 05/16/1995 Entry into force (supplemented by last signed) 05/16/1995 stamped 95-138 C06537817 cover memo

KAV 4937 cover memo. Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3Ade25f72959ab7587f60c3f25854a0226867ed3219165956283a8c46c17f9dc98 for complete metadata about this dataset.

Since 1996, the Center for Military History and Social Sciences of the Bundeswehr (ZMSBw) has conducted a representative survey of the German population on defense and security policy issues on behalf of the Federal Ministry of Defense. In 1996, this study was continued. For this purpose, N = 2568 persons were interviewed on various issues. The present survey focused in particular on Security and threat perception, attitudes toward security policy, foreign deployments of the Federal Armed Forces, tasks of the Federal Armed Forces, the role of conscription, and military cooperation in Europe. 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.

KAV 9353 cover memo

KAV 9354 CAR 2011-0147 First signed 05/15/2008 Last signed 05/28/2008 Entry into force (supplemented by last signed) 05/28/2008 stamped 2011-0147 C06545549 cover memo

Comparison of the image of the USA with that of the Soviet Union as well as attitudes to questions of international policy. Topics: The survey was conducted with a split questionnaire. The common part contained the following questions: most important domestic and foreign policy problems of the country; attitudes to selected countries; desired East-West orientation of the country; stereotype concepts of Americans (list of characteristics); judgement on the influence of American culture on one´s own country; judgement on the American economic system and American foreign policy; attitude to stationing of American troops in the country; contacts with American soldiers; attitude to the conduct of Americans regarding blacks; sources of information about America; attitude to a military intervention by the Americans in the Formosa conflict; assumed result of the peaceful competition of the two great powers; judgement on cultural life as well as the education system in selected countries; desired military and political cooperation with the USA; party preference. Split A: Attitudes to atomic energy, China´s admission into the UN, American Middle and Far East policy; sympathies in case of a war between China and America; judgement on the danger of war (scale); judgement on the USA in comparison to the Soviet Union regarding their military strength and scientific progress; preferred military leadership power; judgement on the conduct of American and other soldiers (only in the Federal Republic); importance of non-military tasks of NATO. Split B: Attitude to selected heads of government, the leadership role of the USA and American foreign policy; assessment of the seriousness of the disarmament efforts of the superpowers; preferred position of one´s own country in a military conflict between the USA and the USSR as well as possibility of neutrality; knowledge about the situation of the disputed islands in the Formosa conflict; trust in NATO; judgement on the USA in comparison to the Soviet Union regarding economic progress (only in the Federal Republic) and existing social class differences. Interviewer rating: social class (not in France) and willingness of respondent to cooperate (only in the Federal Republic); number of contact attempts (not in Great Britain and Italy); city size; date of interview. The following questions were posed in France: house ownership; possession of a car; possession of a radio; employment of household help. The following question was posed in Great Britain: union membership. Also encoded was: identification of interviewer. Vergleich des Images der USA mit dem der Sowjetunion sowie Einstellungen zu Fragen der internationalen Politik. Themen: Die Erhebung wurde mit einem gegabelten Fragebogen durchgeführt. Im gemeinsamen Teil sind folgende Fragen enthalten: Wichtigste innen- und außenpolitische Probleme des Landes; Einstellungen zu ausgewählten Ländern; gewünschte Ost-West-Orientierung des Landes; stereotype Vorstellungen von Amerikanern (Eigenschaftsliste); Beurteilung des Einflusses der amerikanischen Kultur auf das eigene Land; Beurteilung des amerikanischen Wirtschaftssystems und der amerikanischen Außenpolitik; Einstellung zur Stationierung amerikanischer Truppen im Land; Kontakte zu amerikanischen Soldaten; Einstellung zum Verhalten der Amerikaner gegenüber Schwarzen; Informationsquellen über Amerika; Einstellung zu einem militärischen Eingreifen der Amerikaner im Formosa-Konflikt; vermuteter Ausgang des friedlichen Wettbewerbs der beiden Großmächte; Beurteilung des kulturellen Lebens sowie des Bildungssystems in ausgewählten Ländern; gewünschte militärische und politische Zusammenarbeit mit den USA; Parteipräferenz. Split A: Einstellungen zur Atomenergie, zur Aufnahme Chinas in die UNO, zur amerikanischen Mittel- und Fernostpolitik; Sympathien im Falle eines Krieges zwischen China und Amerika; Beurteilung der Kriegsgefahr (Skalometer); Beurteilung der USA im Vergleich zur Sowjetunion bezüglich ihrer militärischen Stärke und des wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts; präferierte militärische Führungsmacht; Beurteilung des Verhaltens amerikanischer und anderer Soldaten (nur in der Bundesrepublik); Wichtigkeit von nicht-militärischen Aufgaben der Nato. Split B: Einstellung zu ausgewählten Regierungschefs, zur Führungsrolle der USA und zur amerikanischen Außenpolitik; Einschätzung der Ernsthaftigkeit der Abrüstungsbemühungen der Supermächte; präferierte Position des eigenen Landes in einer kriegerischen Auseinandersetzung zwischen USA und UdSSR sowie Möglichkeit der Neutralität; Kenntnis der Lage der strittigen Inseln im Formosa-Konflikt; Vertrauen in die Nato; Beurteilung der USA im Vergleich zur Sowjetunion bezüglich des wirtschaftlichen Fortschritts (nur in der Bundesrepublik) und der vorhandenen Klassenunterschiede. Interviewerrating: Schichtzugehörigkeit (nicht in Frankreich) und Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten (nur in der Bundesrepublik); Anzahl der Kontaktversuche (nicht in Großbritannien und Italien); Ortsgröße; Interviewdatum. In Frankreich wurde zusätzlich gefragt: Hausbesitz; Autobesitz; Radiobesitz; Beschäftigung einer Hausangestellten. In Großbritannien wurde zusätzlich gefragt: Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Intervieweridentifikation.