Its time.
Time to get protectionist with US defense spending.
We might not have the best product for a given task.
We might not have the best gear for our troops.
But it needs to be American made. I'm a fan of the CV90. I'm a fan of the Patria AMV. I'm a fan of the Force Protection Europe Ocelot.
But our defense dollars need to be spent on and for US products. Sad fact. We are the biggest market in the world and every corporation in the world is trying to wiggle in on it. Sad fact. If we had even a semi functioning Attorney General Office, then all these mergers/acquisitions wouldn't have gone through. We're allowing legalized monopolies that are destroying our defense base. Sad fact. Our gear will get the job done. There is no need to go overseas for it.
Its time to play this game the way the Chinese, Europeans and other countries around the globe play it. Free Trade is free for some but not for the US. Want a strange take on things? Read the Early Warning Blog. On one of his posts he speaks up mightily for the Beechcraft product in the USAF light attack program vs. the offering from Embraer.
What is that except protectionism?
Its mainstream and its right. Time to protect US industry.
As the private sphere goes so goes...
ReplyDeleteWhen was the last time the FCC turned down a merger request( and we wonder where too big to fail comes from)?
Problem is free trade has become a mantra of the Republican party...even the party of the unions is now warming to the idea of free trade as a cure all.
Our political discourse is to limited arguments that propose false chocies of either being for protectionism or free trade ( kind of like debates on defesne spending).
I hate comparing us to Europe, but look at what the Germans have achieved with a government industrial base policy.
The closest thing we have to that is paying union workers money (after the fact) once they lost their job to unfair foreign competition.
false choices.
ReplyDeletethat covers all the bases right there. you're anti-troop if you want to get the fuck out of IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN now!
you're not a proper Republican if you don't want to see an end to the farce that is free trade.
you're a low life if you're for bringing our troops home and ending these foreign treaties that don't benefit us one bit.
i'm sick and tired of it.
i'm also sick of all the people that write forcefully on the subject on there own blogs and when they have a chance to speak publicly they shrivel like prune in a microwave.
"What is that except protectionism?"
ReplyDeleteIt's him getting paid by Beechcraft and not by Embraer. If Embraer pays him, he will write a post praising their products.
There is a reason the Lexington Institue is not taken seriously.
but they are taken seriously. many blogs and even press people link to there stories. he also is a guest writer for several periodicals.
ReplyDeletethats too simple an explanation.
I meant FTC.
ReplyDeleteYep, he is taken seriously:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/05/post-5.html
There's nothing wrong with a certain level of protectionism, and iirc defense in general is one of those exeptions where it is allowed (according to WTO and NAFTA and what not).
ReplyDeleteHeck, most non-US products are "made in the US" anyway; via assembly, subcontractor work or because of modifications etc.
The EC-145/UH-72 is made by American Eurocopter. :)
no, its assembled in the US, its manufactured in Europe.
ReplyDeleteno smiley faces allowed.
we're not a third world country that needs to bow and scrap to our European overlords. time for an America first policy.
It not that the who they are buying stuff from is American or European, it should be the people they are buying from deliver the damn thing on time and budget.
ReplyDeleteJust because its made by Germans, or French or British doesn't mean we should not have it. Look at the LCS's mission module system. The ship is undergoing testing and those modules still only exist on PowerPoint slides. The Dutch did successfully with their StanFlex system exactly what the LCS is trying to do 20 years ago.
Get the job done and done right. That is what counts. If we start shopping for kit built overseas then maybe the domestic manufacturers will realize how badly they are doing and shape up.
shipbuilding is a whole different kettle of fish. we messed up by allowing our industry to degrade...we messed up by having so much of the industry sent overseas.
ReplyDeletewe need to suffer the pain that it takes to get it build back up again.
i'm willing to do it. are you?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith respect Solomon, if you go down this route, American will be shooting itself in the foot. I work for a British supplying specialist equipment to the F-22, F-35 and V-22 programmes. The reason we were selected is because the primes couldn't find a capable American supplier. If you get rid of us, then you will make these aircraft less able to perform in combat (two of which you are big fans of). It's not entiely fortress European. Just look at the number of European armed forces queuing up for JSF, who already have plenty of 'teen fighters let alone other equipment. There's no harm in protecting key technology areas, but the fact is that to try and protect the entire industry base is a false ecomony that will leave you with a stagnant industry (saying that, still well ahead in certain areas).
ReplyDeleteyeah but only a fool and big damn fool at that could say that NAFTA has been a boon to the US. it opened the door to our manufacturing jobs to leave the US, then Mexico and eventually land in China.
ReplyDeletei understand what you're saying but i would bet that if my proposal was accepted that some enterprising people would develop those devices and electronics on our shores.
as far as nations buying the JSF. not so much a fan of it. in that one instance Sweetman has a point. it isn't about just developing a fighter, the deal is designed not for efficiency but to penetrate markets and develop a monopoly.
i've remained quiet because we're finally doing to them what they've been doing to us. on a purely nationalistic level it would make perfect sense for the EU nations to simply buy the Eurofighter and be done with it...accepting its limitations in future combat.
we are already building the first F35 for a foreign country, the dutch will have one come out of the next batch.
ReplyDeletei'm well aware of the production schedule for the F-35.
ReplyDeletei was simply commenting on how it came about and why i don't think it would be a big deal if those contracts went away.
the US military is driving the cost of the fighter down, not foreign sales.
we could have a much more secure manufacturing process...more dependable manufacturing facilities, make the data less accessible to hackers and pump up our own manufacturing base instead of getting on our knees, sucking dick and begging countries to buy our airplanes.
Overly focused on looking inward is a sure to bring about American decline. It completely ignores the reality of how the world works in the 21st Century.
ReplyDeletenot an inward turn, more like self help.
ReplyDeletewhat does a fat man do? if he wants to live he starts working out and eating healthy. to his friends it looks like hes becoming insular but no, what he's doing is looking after his health.
thats what the US should do.
but we have a strong manufacturing base, and i guarantee if we had to stand up more ship building we could, we have shown great abilities to do so in the past, but in the era of tight budgets we must prioritize what we want and how to get it. Also we have tried isolationism before, between WWI and WWII, didnt work out too well.
ReplyDeleteit worked out fine until the Japanese miscalculated.
ReplyDeleteremember before the attack on Pearl Harbor most Americans were against getting involved in a "European War"...memories were fresh because the first world war brought no benefits to the nation.
even after the attack, the debate was whether we should only fight the Japanese....Churchill, the crafty dog, out foxed Roosevelt and led him by the nose into a European conflict.
well we were right to fight in europe, and it made us stronger, it took us to superpower status. churchill was looking after his own people, we would have done the same if in the same situation. Also the war brought us out of the great depression by making alot of jobs available.
ReplyDeletea war to end a depression? hardly a fair exchange. also remember the early 50;s? i don't but history tells that unemployment after demobilization was back breaking. the real secret to US prosperity was the selling of goods and material to Europe so they could rebuild.
ReplyDeletethey were crushed and needed to build again and we supplied it.
simple as that.
super power status didn't come as a result of our strength, it came as a result of world wide weakness. only brutal Soviet Union was able to keep pace but it was at the expense of their standard of living.
"Churchill, the crafty dog, out foxed Roosevelt and led him by the nose into a European conflict."
ReplyDeleteYou are aware that Germany declared war on the USA, right?
of course. i did state either here that the Japanese miscalculated.
ReplyDeletebefore there attack, the US was in limbo with a large number of citizens not wanting war and even a few siding with the Germans and quite a few more having an unfavorable view of Jews.
its not pretty but history that i've read states that if the Japanese had not attacked, if the Germans had not declared war on the US then despite the moves by Churchill, war would not have been declared for at least another year.
read Churchill's account and his praise (not praise but pleasure) at the Japanese moving the US into the conflict.
but the point remains, Churchill was doing his best to get the US into the war, Roosevelt agreed but didn't think that he could do it with American opinion against it.