Here's what one percent less murder money buys you:

The one percent Treaty Fund gets twenty-seven point two billion dollars to subsidize hyper-efficient pragmatic clinical trials.

The world saves one hundred fourteen billion dollars not spent rebuilding bombed hospitals, treating shrapnel wounds, and housing refugees.

Your lifetime tab is one hundred thirteen thousand five hundred fifty-one dollars per person over eighty years, for bombs in countries you can't find on a map.

How one percent Less Violence Pays For Everything.

An analysis of your D.F.D.A. (a decentralized F.D.A.) shows pragmatic clinical trials can be forty-four point one times more efficient. So the question isn't whether you can afford this. It's where to steal the money.

Two ways you profit from building one percent fewer bombs:

The Captured Money: twenty-seven point two billion dollars per year.

Your governments spend two point seven two trillion dollars yearly on things whose sole purpose is making other things stop existing.

Redirect one percent:

Two point seven two trillion dollars times zero point zero one equals twenty-seven point two billion dollars.

That funds the whole system. One percent. The rounding error on your murder budget.

The Bonus Savings: one hundred fourteen billion dollars per year.

That's the money you grab. Here's the money you stop lighting on fire.

Wars cost eleven point four trillion dollars per year. Build one percent fewer bombs, fight one percent fewer wars, save one hundred fourteen billion dollars.

Eleven point four trillion dollars times zero point zero one equals one hundred fourteen billion dollars.

Money no longer spent on:

Unblowing-up hospitals and bridges.

Removing shrapnel from people you put shrapnel into.

Housing refugees (people whose homes were converted into craters).

Trade disruptions (it turns out shipping containers don't fit through minefields).

Where the one hundred fourteen billion dollars Comes From.

Here's your itemized receipt for violence:

Direct costs total seven point six six trillion dollars, meaning a one percent reduction saves seventy-six point six billion dollars.

Military budgets are two point seven two trillion dollars, saving twenty-seven point two billion dollars.

Destroying infrastructure costs one point eight eight trillion dollars, saving eighteen point eight billion dollars.

Human casualties cost two point four five trillion dollars, saving twenty-four point five billion dollars.

Trade disruption costs six hundred sixteen billion dollars, saving six point one six billion dollars.

Indirect costs total three point seven trillion dollars, meaning a one percent reduction saves thirty-seven billion dollars.

Lost economic growth is two point seven two trillion dollars, saving twenty-seven point two billion dollars.

Veteran healthcare is two hundred billion dollars, saving two billion dollars.

Refugee support is one hundred fifty billion dollars, saving one point five billion dollars.

Environmental damage is one hundred billion dollars, saving one billion dollars.

P.T.S.D. and mental health costs are two hundred thirty-two billion dollars, saving two point three two billion dollars.

Lost human capital is three hundred billion dollars, saving three billion dollars.

The total cost of war is eleven point four trillion dollars, so a one percent reduction saves one hundred fourteen billion dollars.

You capture twenty-seven point two billion dollars for pragmatic clinical trials.

You save one hundred fourteen billion dollars on not breaking stuff.

On your planet, this is called "a good deal." On mine, it's called "so obvious that failing to do it constitutes evidence of a cognitive disability.".

Plus cancer gets cured as a bonus. Almost forgot about that part.

The benefits cascade beyond medicine in ways that should be obvious but apparently aren't. Addiction is a neurological disorder; cure the brain chemistry and the drug trade collapses. Most poverty is catastrophic medical costs; cure the diseases and people can work again.
Radicalization is often untreated mental illness; you can't bomb someone into being mentally stable (you tried this, it didn't work, cost eight trillion dollars, created more radicals). Fix the biology and you fix the society. This is not a new insight.
It's just one your species keeps forgetting because explosions are louder than pharmacology.

The Formulas.

The Captured Dividend is the money you definitely get.

The Societal Dividend is the money you save by being slightly less insane.

The indirect cost of war is calculated as the sum of environmental damage, loss of military growth, loss of capital due to conflict, and psychological costs.

The Elasticity Question.

The elasticity parameter, where e equals one point zero, represents shared enemy amplification where redirecting to disease creates unity, defined as a ratio. The elasticity parameter asks the only interesting question here: if you cut military spending one percent, do war costs actually drop one percent too?
Or do humans, being humans, find a way to keep killing each other at full price?

E equals zero point two five is the "humans are barely trainable" scenario, where only a quarter of cuts reduce violence.

E equals zero point five is the "humans are somewhat rational" scenario, which is historically optimistic.

E equals one point zero is a full match and the baseline assumption, though probably generous given your track record.

E greater than one point zero is the "curing cancer together is better bonding than threatening each other with missiles" scenario, which is suspiciously wholesome.

Here's the thing: it doesn't matter. Even with the most pessimistic assumption (e equals zero point two five), the Captured Dividend of twenty-seven point two billion dollars is guaranteed. That money moves regardless of whether you manage to be less violent. It's a bank transfer, not a prayer.

The Part Where the Math Gets Embarrassing.

First, the guaranteed money is twenty-seven point two billion dollars annually, which is a direct budget transfer that happens if the treaty passes.

Second, in the best case, the total societal benefit reaches one hundred fourteen billion dollars annually, though the range is wide because of your species.

Third, in the worst case, even pessimistic scenarios stay above forty-eight billion dollars annually.

Fourth, for context, the Captured Dividend alone would boost global medical research funding by approximately forty percent over the current sixty-seven point five billion dollar baseline.

You've been spending more on camouflage paint than on curing Alzheimer's.

What You're Assuming (and Where It Gets Shaky).

The G.D.P. Multiplier.

Spend a dollar on weapons, get sixty cents of economic value. Spend a dollar on healthcare, get four dollars and thirty cents back. Your species chose weapons. Every time. For centuries. I've watched you do this for four thousand two hundred ninety-seven years and it has never once gotten less baffling.

The Lost Economic Growth component (two point seven trillion dollars) already captures this difference. It's not double-counted, just consistently ignored.

The Elasticity Assumption.

The Societal Dividend assumes one percent less spending means one percent less war cost.

Reality is messier. Some costs lag by years. Some wars are fueled by boredom rather than budgets. And military spending may occasionally deter a war (though it starts far more than it prevents, which is a bit like crediting your arsonist neighbor for occasionally calling the fire department).

How Good Are the Sources?

I'm being honest about confidence levels, which is more than your defense contractors do.

For military spending, the source is peer-reviewed data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, or SIPRI, and confidence is high.

For infrastructure damage, the source is Brown and Watson Costs of War, and confidence is medium.

For trade disruption, the source is the World Bank, and confidence is medium.

For lost economic growth, the source is SIPRI estimates, and confidence is medium-low.

For psychological impact, the source is a PubMed meta-analysis, and confidence is medium.

For lost human capital, the source is author estimates, and confidence is low.

The Safe Bet.

The Societal Dividend is a ceiling, not a forecast. The confidence intervals are wide because your species is unpredictable (mostly in bad ways).

For policy decisions, use the Captured Dividend (twenty-seven point two billion dollars) as the reliable number. That's money directly moved to medical research. No assumptions about whether humans will fight less. No faith required. Just a bank transfer from the explosion account to the medicine account.

The Societal Dividend is the upside if you manage to behave yourselves. I'm not holding my breath. (I don't have lungs, but the expression stands.)