spending less than 0.2 percent of U.S. output helping Ukraine
Firstly, using percentage of GDP (or "output") as a measure here is incredibly misleading. A GDP of $20.94 trillion doesn't mean the country is $20.94 trillion richer at the end of the year. Much of that money is reinvested in the economy. A better measure might be comparing it to the federal budget of $4.79 trillion, of which $40 billion would be 0.8%. I would call that a significant chunk. NASA's annual budget is $24 billion.
Secondly, this assumes that the money actually goes to "helping Ukraine", whatever that means anyways. How many times has the US spent money on something only to ultimately have it go to the very thing they were spending that money to fight in the first place?
Firstly, using percentage of GDP (or "output") as a measure here is incredibly misleading. A GDP of $20.94 trillion doesn't mean the country is $20.94 trillion richer at the end of the year. Much of that money is reinvested in the economy. A better measure might be comparing it to the federal budget of $4.79 trillion, of which $40 billion would be 0.8%. I would call that a significant chunk. NASA's annual budget is $24 billion.
Secondly, this assumes that the money actually goes to "helping Ukraine", whatever that means anyways. How many times has the US spent money on something only to ultimately have it go to the very thing they were spending that money to fight in the first place?
Shut up, treasonous Russian stooge and fool, and accept the increase of your chocolate ration from 25 grams to 20 grams.