Larger aggregate GDP does nothing significant for the ordinary guy on the street if it is not adequately distributed such that the ordinary guy on the street can get a job that can provide for himself and his family.
A strong defense does nothing significant for a homeless guy with no way to feed his family, or a guy on a minimum wage while multinational fatcats rake in profits that wind up offshore.
Overweighing defense works out to a defense of a system of economic enslavement. Anyway a society consisting of well paid soldiers at the top of the economic pyramid is likely to be a dictatorship, because in order to feed your family, you need to be in the military or government, a la North Korea. What kind of society does the NK military have which is worth protecting? —a hollow society devoid of well-being for the median citizen.
My point is that a nation that doesn’t direct itself to long term military strength gets taken over by a nation that does.
Why would you say military leaders would be wealthy? It is the bankers and investor class who would be wealthy in my scenario, not the military. Military strength is primarily determined by strength of weapons and not number of soldiers.