Comment by mkleczek
4 hours ago
The theory is that in both cases (ie. with and without tariffs) shipyards are going to die sooner or later. It is better for the society to let them die as soon as possible and direct efforts to things we are better at while taking advantage of cheaper ships produced elsewhere.
Some industries are of national security or other strategic value, so protecting them even if that means some stagnation is desirable over the offshoring of said industry.
The question is: how do you define "national security" and "other strategic value"? At the end of the day both really mean economic interest. Especially in case of US.
So if someone says "national security" is above economic interest of US, I would say these people mean _their_ economic interest is above economic interest of US and use both terms as a cover.
There's not much economic interest in losing 100 billion dollars trying to keep shipyards going.
There are no customers who want an oil tanker built in the US. Or Europe.
Insofar as the country being conquered and Americans being slaughtered wholesale would be against our economic interests lol
There are clear national security reasons for the government to prop up shipbuilding and semiconductors.
1 reply →
just don't outsource your means of defense!
With current military technology it is not really possible, is it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdppYYfQJgg describes it really well.
So the question is more about what part of means of defense you outsource. And what parts of means of defense are outsourced by your enemies.
You don't want to base your defense on inferior shipbuilding capabilities, do you?