Why not both? (Within reason)

Because there’s more money in owning stock in companies that supply the military

This is pretty applicable to both libs and cons.

Because infrastructure deals have been passed in the past and nothing changes. Our roads are still bumpy and unfinished in my part and the new houses are still in development, since 2018

It's true that funds for many infrastructure projects aren't protected very well. So they get diverted into other areas, even embezzled by crooked contractors and politicians. It doesn't help that there are differences from State to State how such projects are managed. You point to parts of the system which are quite broken. Doesn't mean we give up and let infrastructure crumble around us. It's not any easy thing to fix but fix it me must.

except that it makes everything more expensive and nothing gets done

While exessive, spending on military is what makes it possible to spend on infrastructure.

The safety of our country is what allows capitalism to work. Investment in US without the security of knowing our systems and autonomy from foreign interference would not possible without our military standing. Think Seattle and Portland without needed policing on a national and world level if the US was weak militarily. Do we overspend? Absolutely. That requires more attention to what goes on within our Congress and Executive branches. Starts with limiting lobbyist for everything in D.C.

I agree with you. We overspend massively but we must spend something to protect our sovereignty.