Interesting question. You think that is the only thing keeping the industry here alive? That would be further proof of the inefficiency of going your preferred "cottage industry" route...instead of the far more efficient, and cheaper approach just making the whole playing field such that the lion's share of production would naturally gravitate to the U.S. shores.
as are nearly 69 percent of the resistors,
Does the 31% we still make satisfy our military needs?
No. Not even close, apparently. And remember...the military needs 100% of what it needs. It needs what it needs...when it needs it. This 50% dependency has created a nightmare situation for real military capacity.
nearly half of the electric coils, transformers, and inductors, Does the military really need all of these components that we produce domestically?
Not all are for the military. Yet. But a lot of them are now imported for the military that we used to make here. Read the Defense Science Board reports. The hollowing-out phenomenon that you keep dis-believing...is real. You keep looking at the monetarist gloss that is put out to rationalize the damage being done with the hollowing out. The median is not the average. Even with the drastic down-sizing of our military...its needs for these discrete components is vastly larger than what we are now producing domestically.
Hence the posture of the Defense contractors which campaigned against the Buy America provisions... Those provisions would not have solved the problem...but would have only gone back to the earlier Reagan era's posture: 75% U.S. composition.
The clear implication of their lobbying posture...is that they are already in violation of the 50% U.S.-content requirement...but no one is pressing the point in the administration.
Congress could pass a law saying that every single thing needed by the military from now on will come from within the US.
You don't want that and you don't mean that because we all know this would rule out stuff like foreign intelligence, sat fotos, etc. just like you don't mean prohibiting taking on supplies at ports of call. You probably don't mind some US radar station in Alaska tapping electricity off a Canadian grid. OK, how about Canadian diesel for the generator or maybe an air filter? Looks like where we're going is somewhere less than 100% and more than 0%. That happens to be what we got.
Everyone likes to bellyache about the Pentagon buying $500 toilet seats but it won't wash. What we need is a better idea. If anyone here is suggesting say, a new law or (better) repealing an old one, let's hear it.
Not at all.
No. Not even close, apparently.
Not even close? Are you saying the military uses more than the entire output of American made resistors? Not that I don't trust you, but I'd need to see some backup for your claim.
Not all are for the military.
Do you want to stick to one topic at a time? You said (well Alan Tonelson) we need these items for the military. So let's look at what the military uses. Don't pull a fast one like the protectionists who whine about steel usage and talk about national defense. We make over 100 million tons of steel a year while the military uses about 1 million tons. Don't tell me we need to protect 100 million tons, tell me we need to protect 1 million tons.
If we need resistors during wartime, I'm more than happy to see our military take all they need out of the 31% we still make here.
Read the Defense Science Board reports. The hollowing-out phenomenon that you keep dis-believing...is real.
Who said I disbelieve any hollowing out? All I've said is that we made $1.79 trillion in manufactured goods last year. If we had to, I'm sure we could move some of that capacity around, while we also increase total output, like we did in WWII.
If we're hollowed out, at $1.79 trillion, China must be positively anorexic at only $780 billion in manufactured goods. How much of their production is cheap TVs, toasters and CD players? Not gonna help them much if war breaks out.
You keep looking at the monetarist gloss that is put out to rationalize the damage being done
Monetarist gloss? Which of your whiners coined that phrase? Does this "monetarist gloss" make the $1.79 trillion look bigger than it really is? What does this gloss do, exactly?
Even with the drastic down-sizing of our military...its needs for these discrete components is vastly larger than what we are now producing domestically.
So you claim, with no solid numbers.