[highball]

Let's see. Do we build navy ships to defend ourselves and project power to protect our interests, or do we build ships to spend money and thereby stimulate the economy? Hmmm.

I think the answer to that is painfully obvious. And pathetic, as well.

It's not even about stimulating the economy. It's about protecting the domestic shipbuilding industry. A patriotic welfare program.

[Wristpin]

Does China even have a blue water navy? How many active duty billets does eliminating one of these ships pay for?

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

It's about protecting the domestic shipbuilding industry. A patriotic welfare program.

I'm not commenting on this particular shipbuilding bill. In general, we do need to maintain a certain number of viable shipbuilders.

You don't just conjure up the ability to build nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines, or advanced surface combatants, out of thin air.

It's not welfare, it's maintaining a strategic asset.

[jpsb]

We stopped building ships here long ago. At one time, before our leader drank the free trade kool-aid, we were a major ship builder, but since it was cheaper to build ships in Asia we gave away our ship building industry. Now surprise surprise our Navy is having a dificult time building ships. Free trade kills.

[jpsb]

The domestic shipbuilding industry died in the 70's, it was the first "free trade rocks" industry to be exported to Asia.