So if you don't know what it is, or if it's real and you don't care if increases become official, how do you know that it went up and how much do you want it to go up by? This whole things reads like a child wanting a thing without knowing what he actually wants but he knows he's pissed off.
Just because I don't know exactly what China's military spending is - which isn't entirely accurate since people who do know put it at 1.7% - doesn't mean I then substitute a comforting story that the secret number is much higher. Since you seem obsessed with a concrete ask, here it is: I want the official Chinese defense budget to reach the 2% NATO minimum. That's a thing with me.
How is it limited by funding?
Its growth rate is limited by funding. When J-20s are produced at a fraction of the rate of F-35s, I know the problem isn't technological, but funding limitations.
What part of China's spending is unimportant and should be diverted?
This isn't government spending but societal spending more broadly. The part that should be diverted is the part that blew up real estate prices to malignant levels. China's youth unemployment is at high double-digit levels and a healthy chunk of them have STEM degrees, I'm sure that with a little extra currency the Chinese military-industrial complex can go on a hiring spree.
It's my impression that the PLA is funded by as much as they can intelligently and beneficially use, with minimal glut or fat as seen in the US military.
This reads like a fervent religious believer's conviction in his deity's omniscience. I can believe that 1. The CPC is the best governing body on Earth by far and 2. It needs to correct course on the issue of military spending. They're not mutually exclusive and I don't require the CPC to be 100% right on every issue ever until the end of time.
It does not mean useless so you can't evaluate this without knowing what is in the works and how soon it will arrive.
We don't know in detail but we do have some idea. We know, for instance, that the WS-15 will enter mass production in a couple of years. We know that CAC pawned off J-10 production to GAIC to expand capacity for J-20s. All very welcome. But we also know that CAC isn't expanding its factory space or hiring substantially more workers. I would like that to change.
The PLA calibrated it to a good balance between being flooded with suboptimal designs and having nothing to protect yourself with.
How recently has that rate been calibrated because it strikes me that it hasn't been calibrated for a while. Perhaps a recalibration is in order.
The US has no urgency to defeat the USSR; it is reversed from now. The USSR was fading so the US wanted to bide for time. Now, it is China who wants to do that as China is outgrowing the US. The urgency is reversed.
Yes, but that doesn't mean that China can be lazy and complacent or think that the appropriate defense spending rate in 1993 should hold indefinitely.
But you presume to understand the lessons and you presume that they don't, or didn't or that they don't have a better analysis/conclusion.
True, yet I still assume it. Just because they're excellent doesn't mean they're infallible or that in this specific circumstance I might *gasp* know better.