Earlier, I stupidly tweeted out an article about the Jones Act and shipbuilding and Colin Grabow, from the Cato Institute, liked it (he was quoted in the article). I looked him up and decided to listen to this video on the shipbuilding competition between China and the US, where he and a lawyer for United Steelworkers were on the panel. China is eating their lunch, and it’s the ruling elites’ own fault, yet they scapegoat China for it. The double standards over China’s “unfair economic practices” AKA the subsidizing of their shipbuilding industry irritates me (liars irritate me even more). States give subsidies, grants, and tax breaks to corporations, all the time. Fincantieri Marinette Marine is just one example, but Wisconsin had done the same for Foxconn. Foxconn received tax breaks and $3B in subsidies, which was “the largest ever subsidy provided by a state to a foreign company”, despite not living up to their promises.
Colin Grabow wants to end the Jones Act. I’ve made at least three video clips regarding the Jones Act, two with Sal Mercogliano from What’s Going On With Shipping and one from the government-funded CSIS (I’ve posted them, below).Spoiler alert: Sal says that the problem isn’t the Jones Act.Meanwhile, both CSIS and the Cato Institute (part of the Atlas Network) blame the Jones Act. Deregulation is a wet dream of big corporations (which fund both the Cato Institute and CSIS).
Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro and senior members of his staff met with Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, members of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s cabinet, and the leadership of Fincantieri Marinette Marine to coalesce federal, state, and local initiatives to ensure timely completion and delivery of the Constellation-class frigate.
NASA’s administrator is once again making outrageous claims about China’s space capabilities — and in the process, fueling the off-world rivalry between the two.
Sources with knowledge of the planning have told Reuters Washington will consider appointing a four-star commander for Japan to match the rank of the head of Japan’s new military headquarters. Experts say a U.S. officer of that rank could lay the groundwork for a future unified Japanese-U.S. command.
The current structure of alliance command and control is not sufficient for the task. U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ) has changed little since the 1960s, when Japan was viewed as little more than a platform for U.S. military operations across the region. USFJ’s authorities and staffing are limited primarily to administering alliance agreements related to the 50,000-plus U.S. personnel stationed in Japan with the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Army. U.S. forces in Japan represent some of the most important U.S. military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific, but the three-star USFJ commander has limited joint operational authorities, and the separate U.S. service elements in Japan report back to their component headquarters in Hawaii.
The Littoral Combat Ship was meant to start the Navy’s operational renaissance. But a chorus of naysayers and critics have put service leaders on the defensive, insisting that the troubled program has turned a corner.
You must be logged in to post a comment.